The  person  charging  this  material  is  re- 
sponsible for  its  return  to  the  library  from 
which  it  was  withdrawn  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 
are  reasons  'or  disciplinary  action  and  may 
result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  LIBRARY  AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


BUILDING  USE  ONLY 


r 


\ 


L161  — 0-1096 


, , 


. 


HE  BYZANTINE  INFLUENCE  UPON  OTTOMAN 


ARCHITECTURE 


BY 

RICHARD  LEWIS  ALDRICH 


THESIS 

FOR  THE 

DEGREE  OF  BACHELOR  OF  ARTS 

IN 


HISTORY 


COLLEGE  OF  LIBERAL  ARTS  AND  SCIENCE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


1920 


' 


■ 


♦ 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT. 


The  most  compel -nt  of  students  cannot  undertake  a 
study  and  bring  it  to  a finish  without  assistance  from 
others.  Therefore, a novice  has  a double  obligation  for 
the  greater  ammount  of  criticism  necessary  for  his  work. 

commuer/v*-' 

This  thesis  has  received  much  criticism  from  Professor 
Albert  Howe  Lybyer,  of  the  department  of  History.  Assistant 
Professor  Rexford  Newcomb  of  the  Department  of  Architecture 
pointed  out  carefully  the  many  dangers  to  be  found  indeal- 
ing with  architecture  historically.  Miss  Winifred  Fehren- 
kamp  has  been  more  than  merely  professionally  obliging 
with  regard  to  material  in  the  Architectural  Library.  In 
Chicago, Mr.  Lionel  Robertson  made  it  possible  for  me  to 
see  many  objects  of  Byzantine  art  which  would  have  been 
inaccessible  without  his  aid. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/byzantineinfluenOOaldr 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


Adams, Henry  "Mount  Saint  Michel  and  Chartres” 

Houghton, Mifflin  Co., Hew  York, 1913. 

Begni, Ernesto, "The  Vatican”  Hew.  Yor*,1914. 

Bell. Edward , "The  Architecture  of  Ancient  Egypt” 

G.  Bell  and  Sons, London  1915. 

Beylie,Leon,  ”L' habitation  byzantin”  1902. 

Boi to , Camillo , "The  Basilica  of  Saint  Mark"  1988. 

Calvert , Albert , " Moorish  Remains  in  Soain" 

John  Lane  Co.,  London, 1906. 

Chipiez , Charles , "History  of  Art  in  Persia” 

Chapman  and  Hall , London, 1892. 

Coll ingwood, William  Gresham, "The  Philosophy  of  Ornament", 
G. Allen, Orpington, Kent , 1883. 

Conway, Sir  William  Martin,  "The  Domain  of  Art" 


J.  Murray , London, 1913. 

Curzon,The  Hon.  G.K. , "Persia  and  the  Persian  Question" 
London,1892. 

Dalton, Ormunde  Haddock, "By zantine  Art  and  Archaeology" 

-n-i.vn  ?larS3£°£  Press , Oxford  , 1911 . 

Diehl , Charles,  "Etudes  Byzant  ms” , 

A.Picaud  et  fils , Paris , 1905. 

Dieulafoy, Marcel, "L'Art  Antique  de  la  Perse" 


Paris, 1884. 

D ' Av ennes , pr i s se , "L'Art  Arabe", 

V. Morel  et  Cie. , Paris, 1878. 

Flanigan, J,F. , " The  Origin  of  the  Early  By zantine Silk  Loom", 
The  Burlington  Magazine ,Vol. XXXV, October , 1919. 

Purges son, James, "A  History  of  Architecture", 

Dodd, Mead  and  Co.,  Lew  York,  1907. 

Gibbon, Edward , "The  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire", 
Macmillan  Co.,  Hew  York, 1914. 

Hamlin, A. D .F . , "A  History  of  Ornament", 

The  Century  Co.,  Hew  York, 1916. 

Harvey, Lethaby, and  others, "The  Church  of  the  nativity", 

B. T. Bat sf or d, London, 1913. 

Jackson , Thomas  Graham, "By zantine  and  Roamnesriue  Architecture 
Cambridge  University  Press, 1915. 

Xluchev sky , V . 0 . , "A  History  of  Russia", 

J.M.Dent  and  Sons,  London, 1913. 


Longfellow, W.P.P. , "An  Encyclopedia  of  Art  in  Italy, Greece, 
and  the  Levant" . Charles  Scribners’ Sons, U^w  York, 1895. 
Lybyer , Albert  Howe, "The  Government  of  the  Ottoman  Eraoire", 
The  harvard  University  press. 


N 


" 

' 

. 

. 

■ 

. 

. 

* 

* ' 


’ 


.. 

•• 

, 


Ricci , Corado , "Art  in  Northern  Italy", 

Charles  Scribners’  Sons, New  York, 1911. 

Rockhill.W.W. , "The  Jouney  of  7/illiam  of  Rubruck", 

Printed  for  the  Hakluyt  Society , London, 1900 . 

Rivoira ,0. , "Moslem  Architecture" , 

Humphrey  Milford , London,  London, 1910. 

Robert  son, Alexander , "The  Bible  of  Saint  Mark," 

Dodd, Mead  and  Co., Lew  York, 1898. 

Scot t, Leader , "Cathedral  Builders", 

Charles  Scribners ' Sons, New  York, 1899. 

Struges, Russel, "A  Dictionary  of  Architecture  and  Building". 

Texier  and  Pullman, "By zantine  Architecture" 

London, 1864. 

Timur  the  Emperor , "Institutes" 

Daniel  Stuart , Calcutta, 1785. 

Van  Millingen, Alexander , "Byzantine  Constantinople", 

J. Mur ray , London, 1899 . 

Verneith-Puiraseau.Fel ix  de , "L ' Architecture  byzantin  en  France" 
V.Didrin, Par is, 1850. 

Violiet  -le-Duc , "LlArt  Russe", 

(/  V. A. Morel, Paris, 1899. 

Vogue , Melchoir  de,"Les  Eglises  de  la  Terre  Sainte", 

/ V.Didron, Paris, 1840. 

Vogue, Melchoir  de,"La  Syrie  Centrale", 

Koblet  et  Baudry , Paris, 1865. 

Ward , James. "Historic  Ornament " , 

Chapamn  and  Hall , London, 19C 9. 

Williams , Leonard , "The  Arts  and  Crafts  of  Older  Spain", 
A.C.McClurg  and  Co.,  New  York, 1908. 

Young, J. J. , "The  Ceremie  Art ".Harper  and  Brother, New  York, 1897. 

Curtin, Jeremiah, "The  Mongols  in  Russia", 

Little, Brown  and  Co.,  Boston, 1908. 

D ' Ohsson, Baron  G.,"Histoire  des  Mongols", 

Frederick  Mueller .Amsterdam, 1852. 

Dwight ,H.G. , "Constantinople  Old  and  New", 

Charles  Scribners' Sons , New  York, 1915. 

Foord, Edward , "The  Byzantine  Emoire", 

Adam  and  Charles  Black, London, 1911. 

Kimball  and  Sdgell,"A  History  of  Architecture", 

Har  per  and  Brothers, New  York,  1918. 

Gurlitt, Cornelius , "Die  Baukunst  Constantinopels" . 

Four  volumes  of  Plates. 


1 

• ' • - : 


~ • . : 

• .. 

■ 

. 

.. 

' 


* ■ 


THE  BYZANTINE  INFLUENCE  UPON  OTTOMAN  ARCHITECTURE. 


I 

Introduction 


I I 

A historical  sketch  cf  the  architectural  development  in 
the  East  . . Empire  from  the  third  to  the  fourteenth  cent- 
ury. 

1.  The  Roman  element. 

(a)  Its  rapid  modification. 

2.  The  Syrian  element. 

(a)  The  origin  . 

(b)  The  application. 

3.  The  Persian  element. 

4.  A resume  of  the  culmination  cf  these  elements. 

5.  The  confluence  of  these  elements  into  the  Byzantine  arch- 

itecture of  the  sixth  century. 

6.  The  transition  from  the  sixth  to  the  tenth  century.  . 

7.  The  slight  Seljuk  element  ir.  the  architecture  of  the  later 

East  Roman  Empifce. 


Ill 

The  Ottoman  Turks, and  their  coming  into  the  Byzantine  world. 

1.  Their  early  Asiatic  envcirnment. 

(a)  The  art  of  barbarian  culture, 

2.  Their  migrations  in  the  Mongol  dispersions. 

(a)  The  influence  encountered  in  the  transition, especially 
under  the  Sassanids. 

3.  The  sojourn  in  Bithynia. 

(a)  The  contact  here  with  the  Greek  and  the  Seljuk  influences. 


I V 

The  general  state  of  culture  in  the  later  days  of  the  Empire, 

1,  A view  of  Byzantine  society  in  the  fifteenth  century. 

2.  The  attitude  of  the  Ottoman  Turks  toward  the  civisilaticn 

cf  the  Byzantine  Empire. 


• 

• 

. 

• 

. 

. . 

. 

• 

. 

■ 

. : 

V 


The  architecture  of  the  Ottoman  Turks. 

1.  The  buildings  of  Brusa  and  Adrianople. 

2.  The  buildings  of  Mohammed  II. 

(a)  The  confiscation  cf  the  Christian  Churches. 

(1)  The  fate  of  the  Church  cf  the  Apostles. 

(b)  The  new  foundations. 

(1)  The  mosque  of  Mohammed  II. 

(a)  Christopoulcs. 

(1)  His  Byzantine  structure  model. 

(2)  The  decoration  of  the  mosque. 

3. The  mosque  of  Bsyazid  I and  of  Selim  I ; the  mosque  of 
Eycub. 

4.  Architecture  under  Suleiman  and  Si nan. 

(a)  The  Suleimanieh. 

(b)  Other  works  of  Sir.an. 

(c)  The^.rt  of  Sinan. 

(1)  His  reliance  upon  Sancta  Sophia. 

(2)  His  decoration. 

5.  Later  Ottoman  biuldir.gs. 

(a)  The  great  mosques. 

(b)  The  lesser  Imperial  and  commemorative  mosques. 

(c)  Civil  and  domestic  architecture. 

(d)  The  tombs. 


V I 

The  Byzantine  character  of  Ottoman  architecture. 

1.  The  lack  of  an  original  Turkish  art  of  building. 

(a)  Their  late  arrival  in  Europe  prevented  the  growth 
of  a completely  different  style  of  architecture. 

2.  The  extent  and  significance  of  Byzantine  architecture 

at  the  time  of  the  Turkish  conquest. 

3.  The  genius  of  the  Turks  in  adopting  and  modifying  the 

indigenous  Byzantine  art. 


I 


■ 


TH-6]  BYZANTINE  INFLUENCE  UPON  OTT OMAN  ARCH ITECTURE. 


INTRODUCTION 

Many  studies  which  are  written  uoon  historical 
subjects  are  concerned  with  explaining  the  politic- 
al  mechanism  which  controls  the  life  of  a peoole.it 
takes  a considerable  effort’  on  the  part  of  the  average 
student  to  secure  the  full  comprehension  of  historical 
study.  Re  realises  that  even  in  a democratic  country, 
the  place  that  political  thinking  occupies  in  daily 
life  is  comparatively  small, and  yet, in  his  study  of  that 
people  the  oolitical  activities  hold  by  far  the  greatest 
emphasis.  If  politics, in  general, have  little  concern  for 
life  today,the  analogy , suggested  by  the  cynicism  of  his- 
tory that  there  is  no  improvement  in  the  nature  of  man, 
relates  the  same  condition  in  the  past.  This  paradox  oro- 
vokes  a search  for  a sounder  view. 

TAhat  is  history?  Clearly  , the  conception  of  the 
study  as  one  related  exclusively  to  records, oast  and 
present, is  not  fully  competent;  and  while  it  may  be  un- 
wise to  attempt  an  arbitrary  definition.it  is  pertinent 
that  the  study  of  history  has  a function 

that  is  more  than  that  of  an  account.  Its  function  is  not 

only  to  relate  facts, but  to  set  them  in  their  groups, also, 
and  to  start  them  moving  as  lines  of  force. 


' 


I 


. 


. 


These  lineB  are  incised  deepest  upon  sooiety  in  the  lives  of 
the  masses  of  people. 

It  is  by  regarding  history  as  a sort  of  map  of  tendencies 
that  one  may  understand  the  objectivity  sometimes  attributed 
to  the  study, — that  of  explaining  the  present.  In  any  period, 
the  nearest  that  one  may  approach  to  infalli  bility  in  history 
is  by  means  of  a sound  knowledge  of  its  art.  It  is  only  in 
its  art  that  a people  leaves  an  accurate  record  of  themselves. 

The  aim  of  this  essay  is  to  point  out  an  artistic  in- 
fluence expressing  much  of  the  life  of  one  people, and  to 
show  how  forcefully  it  has  become  the  chief  expression  of 
a totally  different  nation.  In  that  group  of  ideas  and  char- 
acteristics which  represents  the  Turkish  nation, there  are 
two  of  particular  importance:  one  is  a respect  for  law; the 
other, an  ability  for  adaptation, whether  it  be  in  military 
matters, in  religion, or  in  manner  of  expression. The  Eyzantine 
influence  in  Ottoman  architecture  may  seem  a rather  obvious 
force  in  the  history  of  art, but  in  treating  of  the  subject, 
one  sees  a very  important  phase  in  the  development  of  the 
Turkish  people, and  in  their  art, the  hand  of  the  living  past. 


. 

- 

: 


3 


A HISTORICAL  SKETCH  OF  THE  ARCHITECTURAL  DEVELOPMENT 
IN  THE  EAST  ROMAN  EMPIRE  FROM  THE  THIRD  TO 
THE  FOURTEENTH  CENTURY 

% 

In  the  East,  as  well  as  in  the  West,  the  parent  archi- 
tectural style  upon  which  the  architecture  of  the  Christian 
era  rests  is  that  of  the  Roman  builders.  When  they  began  to 
assume  the  political  control  of  Greece,  Thrace,  and  Syria, 
the  Romans  found  in  those  countries  a style  of  construction 
which  had  been  derived  from  structures  of  Greek  origin.  For 
the  comparatively  few  public  buildings  which  the  Hellenic 
world  found  it  necessary  to  erect  for  their  needs,  the  Greek 
manner  of  building,  with  its  perfection  of  light  and  shade 
arrangement,  its  balance  of  decoration,  and  its  simplicity, 
had  been  admirable.  The  Greek  temple  was  a work  of  art  as 
well  as  a work  of  utility;  the  Remans,  however,  while  quite 
able  to  appreciate  the  value  of  a somewhat  less  refined  beauty 
in  architecture,  were  unable  to  give  to  it  the  attention  and 
care  which  any  art  must  have.  Their  mission  in  the  former 
empire  of  Alexander  was  to  control  it  for  the  purpose  of  keep- 
ing the  peace,  and  to  exploit  the  country  for  its  wealth;  to 
take  too  much  effort  for  a mere  structure  3eemed  to  them  to 
be  ridiculous.  Consequently,  architects  as  well  as  other 
students  of  art  have  been  accustomed  to  call  the  building 


; ’ 


i . 1 

, i , / 


* - 


7 

activities  of  the  Romans  in  Asia  Minor  and  Syria  degenerate 
when  placed  for  comparison  beside  the  structures  of  the 
acropolis  of  Pergamum  or  the  temple  at  Ephesus.  So  they  are, 
from  the  point  of  view  that  a civic  structure  must  be  near 
perfect  in  the  artistic  sense.  To  the  Roman  governor  of 
Syria,  however,  the  problem  was  one  of  immediate  practicability. 
The  temples  in  his  province  were  buildings  for  a formal  state 
worship;  the  other  buildings  were  converted  from  those  reared 
by  the  conquered  peoples  of  the  province,  save  for  the  palaces, 
theatres  and  baths  which  were  erected  at  a later  period  for 
enjoyment  rather  than  for  administration.  For  after  the  time 
of  Augustus  the  Greek  kingdoms  of  the  Esst  became  integral 
parts  of  the  Empire,  not  merely  military  districts;  the  cities 
then  fied  with  each  other  in  their  adornment.  From  the  first,, 
however,  the  eastern  half  of  the  Roman  Empire  had  to  be  kept 
under  military  surveillance,  and  this  necessitated  the  erection 
of  many  military  stations.  New  settlements  were  made,  such 
as  those  on  the  frontier  roads  like  Petra  and  Palmyra,  on  the 
edge  of  the  desert  in  the  tran3-Jordan  country.  It  is  to  the 
civic  architecture  of  these  and  older  cities,  before  their 
subsequent  history  in  non-Roman  hands,  that  we  must  look  for 
the  beginnings  of  permanent  Roman  contributions  to  early 
Christian  architecture. 


A characteristic  structure  of  Roman  architecture  was 


theba silica*  brought  from  Greece  in  the  late  days  of  the  Roman 

Republic!  This  structural  form  i9  known  to  have  been  employed 

in  building  the  forum  basilicas  which  were  used  as  law  courts 

and  public  gathering  places,  like  the  modern  Exchange  or  the 
2 

Auditorium,  as  early  as  the  year  184  B.  C.  Pliny  names  two 
subsequent  basilicas  as  the  most  notable  buildings  in  the 
city.  Indeed,  practically  all  of  the  civic  buildings  took 
this  form.  It  was  essentially  the  form  of  a covered  portico* 

The  two  rows  of  columns  of  the  portico  bear  each  a superimposed 
colonnade  on  which  rests  the  roof.  The  eaves  were  extended 
our  from  the  top  of  the  columns  to  a distance  equal  to  about 
half  the  width  of  the  colonnade,  so  that  they  had  to  be  sup- 
ported by  walls;  thus  they  formed  the  covering  of  a wide  aisle 
on  either  side  of  the  central  aisle  of  the  colonnade,  later 
called  the  nave.  The  side  aisles  returned  at  each  end  of  the 
building.  A superficial  glance  revealed  the  basilicas  as 
simply  a two  story  building  in  the  shape  of  a parallelogram, 
having  a width  a little  more  than  a third  of  the  length,  and 
covered  by  a shallow  roof,  supported  between  the  walls  by  two 
rows  of  columns? 

1 In  general,  the  Greek  peristyle  temple  form  was  borrowed,  but 

seldom  used,  without  modification;  the  cella  was  toe  small.  Un- 

like the  Greeks,  the  Romans  did  not  always  employ  a complete 
peristyle.  Their  temples  thus  recall  those  of  Etruria.  James 
Fergusson,  History  of  Architecture,  Vol.,1,  page  306. 

2 R.  Sturgis;  "A  Dictionary  of  Arch,  and  Building",  page  224. 

3 R.  Sturgis;  "A  Dictionary  of  Arch,  and  Building",  page  227. 


c 


In  the  early  examples,  one  end  of  the  parallelogram 
took  the  form  of  a semicircle,  crowned  by  a hemispherical  dome. 
Here  liT  the  Tribune  3at  in  the  Roman  days  an  officer  of  justice, 
ready  to  hear  the  case  of  anyone  who  should  seek  him  in  this 
public  place. 

After  the  days  of  Augustus  there  v;a3  a state  of  quiet 
in  the  Eastern  provinces,  making  for  economic  development  and 
consequently  calling  into  need  many  more  buildings.  The  mili- 
tary cities  such  as  Palmyra  and  Petra  have  been  mentioned. 

There  are  ruins  of  cities  dating  from  the  Roman  period  in  the 
Judean  Negeb,  through  Palestine  and  Syria,  and  in  Asia  Minor; 
their  very  names  often  supplement  the  evidence  of  their  origin: 
Tiber ias,  Caesarea,  Caesarea  Phillipi,  and  Maximanopolis. 

From  the  basilicas  of  these  cities  and  many  others  affected 
by  the  architectural  phase  of  Roman  occupation,  the  architecture 
of  the  East  Roman  Empire  grew,  until  it  reached  the  end  of  its 
development  in  the  Neo- Byzantine  style  of  the  XIV  century. 

Lack  of  materials  and  the  pressure  of  economy  subsequently 
perverted  the  basilica  into  a phantasm  of  its  original  form  in 
the  East,  so  that  it  becomes  an  octagon  or  even  a circle  within 
a square;  nevertheless  the  transitions  may  be  traced  and  account- 
ed for  by  the  examination  of  new  factors. 

To  the  student,  the  founding  of  new  Rome  on  the  shores 
of  the  Bosphorus  in  324  announces  an  interesting  innovation 
in  construction.  Constantine,  in  talking  over  the  Christian 

1 This  adaptation  may  be  observed  actually  in  the  Pompeian 

excavations.  Sometimes  the  exedra  was  adjoined  the  basilica, 
not  unlike  the  Apse  of  eccles is.st ical  architecture. 


7. 


faith  set  aside  the  existing  basilica  type  of  temple.  The  cella 
was  usually  too  small  for  the  congregation.  The  basilica  w as 
still  needed,  of  course,  for  civic  purposes1.  The  pre-Con- 
stantine Christian  edifices  existed  only  by  the  sufferance  of 
the  tolerant  Emperors,  persecutions  swept  them  away  in  occasion- 
al storms.  Probably  most  of  the  early  places  of  worship 
were  profa.ne  structures  employed  when  there  seemed  to  be  no 
danger  in  public  worship;  there  are,  however,  records2 3  of  a 
few  splendid  structures  before  the  conversion  of  Constantine. 
Constantine's  architects  say  the  utility  of  the  general 
basilica  plan,  however,  and  employed  its  flexibility  for  form- 
ing the  plans  of  all  of  their  structures.  The  later  basilicas 
differed  accordingly  from  the  one  already  described.  The 
exterior  was  built  up  by  courses  of  unplastered  brick,  in  place 
of  the  stone  courses  of  earlier  days.  In  addition,  there  was 
in  the  later  plan  a court  or  atrium  in  front,  and  the  two 
rows  of  columns  in  the  central  structure  were  covered  by  a 
roof  from  under  which  the  clerestory  windows  looked  upon  the 
roof  of  the  side  aisles.  The  apse  of  the  older  churches  was 
placed  at  the  western  end  of  the  basilica,  and  the  altar  stood 
before  the  center  of  the  apse  chord?  There  grew  to  be  more 

1 Texier  and  Pullman( Byzantine  architecture)  p.12,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  architectural  activities  of  St.  Helena  and  of 
Constantine.  "...  but  with  the  exception  of  the  Lincinian 
basilica  at  Rome,  we  know  of  no  other  law  court  that  was 
used  for  Christian  worship". 

2 The  great  church  at  Nicomedia  as  an  example,  was  pulled 

down  under  the  edict  of  Diocletian. 

3 St.  Agatha,  Ravenna,  was  agreed  upon  as  the  first  church  to 
place  the  apse  at  the  east  end.  This  church  was  built  in 
417;  the  practice  soon  became  general. 


f 


* • 


2 


s 


cases  cf  the  double  side  aisle,  end  a passage  called  the  narthex, 
at  right  angles  to  the  nave,  separating  it  and  its  aisles  from 
the  atrium,  as  at  the  first  St.  Peter’s,  in  Rome1, * 3  The  church 
was  built  by  Constantine  about  sixteen  yeare  after  the  victory 
at  the  Milvian  Bridge,  and  it  is  a notable  Christian  adaptation 
of  the  ancient  basilica.  Later,  tnere  were  other  changes 
as  the  development  of  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy  became 
crystalized.  The  altar  and  the  apse  were  raised  and  shut  off 
as  the  chancel  , and  the  choir,  which  was  in  front  of  the  altar, 
was  also  enclosed  from  the  nave  by  a low  wall.  The  cencelli, 
the  low  wall  separating  the  apse  and  the  choir,  became  ex- 
ceedingly rich  andelaborate.  A very  dignified  treatment  of 
it  is  that  in  the  Byzantine  cathdral  of  San  Marco  in  Venice. 

The  material  of  the  typical  basilica  was  brick,  and  the  roof 
was  usually  of  wood.  Not  only  the  structural  materials,  but 
also  the  columns  and  decorations  of  the  interior  found  their 
way  into  the  churches  from  the  demolished  pagan  temples. 

On  these  elements  of  Roman  building  there  is  yet  one 
more  development  of  importance  to  the  student  of  Byzantine 
architecture.  This  element  is  the  liberation  of  the  arch 
from  the  entablature,  sn  innovation  made  by  the  architects  of 

1 One  of  the  most  interesting  churches  in  modern  Rome  is  that 
called  St.  Paolo  fuori  le  Mura,  which  is  a survival  of  the 

age  of  Constantine,  and  possibly  a contemporary  structure 
to  the  first  basilica  of  St.  Peter.  The  present  building 
is  really  a restoration,  made  after  the  burning  of  the 
original  in  1823. 

3 This  raised  and  enclosed  apse  forms  the  "berna"  of  churches 
designed  for  the  Greek  ritual;  the  chavell  becomes  the 
"iconostasis”.  The  entablature  on  the  silver  column  of 
the  iconostasis  al  Santo  haplia  was  used  as  a foot  path  for 
the  lamplighter  at  the  Church. 


r 


Diocletian  at  Spaleto  in  303.  The  Roman  builders  had  followed 

a 

the  Greek  manner  of  surmounting  all  capitals  with  an  establa- 
ture  prior  to  the  change;  and  in  adopting  the  arch,  the  Romans 
built  it  from  the  entablature  surmounting  the  capitols  of 
the  colonnade.  Where  the  arch  and  the  supporting  pier  had 
been  used  together  before,  there  had  been  no  use  of  the  order, 
the  construction  being’  U3ed  for  aqueducts  and  bridges.  On 
no  important  structure  prior  had  the  arch,  the  order  and  the 
entablature  been  employed  without  the  fantastic  interruption 
of  the  space  by  the  dividing  entablature^.  Thi3  simple  change, 
in  architecture,  was  as  important  for  that  art  as  the  aar- 
ccphagus  studies  of  Donatello  were  for  sculpture,  or  the  ex- 
periments of  Mantegna  and  Claude  Lorraine  have  been  for  painting. 
Basilicas  of  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries  differ  little 
from  those  of  the  fourth.  The  style  was  unprogressive  be- 
cause it  offered  no  important  problems  to  its  builders.  As 
Mr.  Jackson  remarks  in  his  study  of  Romanesque  Architecture, 
the  basilica  demanded  no  skill  superior  to  that  of  the  brick- 
layer (save  possibly  in  the  quadro spherical  dome  of  the  apse); 
the  exterior  was  barren.  The  interior  of  most  early  basilicas 
was  often  as  much  of  a review  of  vandal  depredation  containing 
fine  marbles,  columns  and  capitols  of  ancient  temples  and 
palaces  as  it  was  a display  of  architectural  ability  and  taste. 
Erected  as  most  churches  the  period  were  in  times  of  great 
political  and  economic  unrest,  they  are  usually  monuments  to 


1 In  the  church  of  Santo  Spirito,  Florence  (Brunelleschi,  built 
ca.  1440)  the  use  of  this  entablature  block  adds  a c-ertain 
richness*  although  it  makes  the  columns  top  heavy,  and  on  the 
whole  has  a rather  pedantic  appearance. 


- 


t 


/» 

the  seemingly  apparently  barren  growth  of  early  middle  ages 
save  for  ornamentation,  there  is  little  difference  between 
churches  of  the  fourth  century  as  S Apollonaire  in  Classe 
at  Ravenna,  and  the  tenth  century  cathedral  of  Civita-  Cas- 
tellana,  or  the  cathedral  at  Matera.  In  architecture,  if 
not  in  all  ramifications  of  human  endeavor,  the  Middle  Ages 
were  dependent  rather  than  creative,  until  the  time  when  the 
chaotic  situation  resulting  from  the  fall  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
the  barbarian  invasions,  and  the  complete  formation  of  the 
Church  should  be  compounded  into  a new  soil  for  a notably 
creative  civilization,  of  which  was  to  be  a beautiful  and 
vigorous  architecture. 

Thus  in  the  West,  the  styles  made  possible  as  Roman- 
esque, Byzantine  and  Gothic  had  been  potentially  released 
by  the  innovation  in  the  immense  praetorian  camp-palace 
of  Diocletian.  The  basilica  became  the  fortress- like  church 
in  southern  France  where  the  style  held  forth  until  re- 
placed by  the  Gothic,  a process  which  seems  to  have  been  near- 
ly complete  by  the  thirteenth  century.  The  transition  from 
the  massive  piles  of  the  Romanesque  structure  to  the  slender 
solemn  edifices  of  Gothic  mysticism — a change  which  Mr. 

Mams  describes  as  the  passing  of  the  Church  Militant  to 
the  Church  Architectural  --  is  a record  for  the  West  of  the 
development  of  a new  feeling  for  the  faith,  and  at  the  same 
time  of  the  change  in  the  nature  of  medieval  society^-.  But 
in  the  East  there  were  no  Aoelards  or  Anselms,  or  men  as 


1 Henry  Adams  "Mount  Saint  Michel  and  Chartres"  Chapter  1 and I I 


powerful  as  Saint  Thomas  Aquinas  to  rear  a "Church  Architect- 
ural" by  incorporating  the  canon  as  the  skeleton  of  their 
own  vast  theological  structures.  The  Greek  Church,  through 
the  Middle  Ages  as  today  derives  its  strength  from  the  early 
Fathers,  and  there  has  been  no  cross  current  in  their  dynamic 
force.  Consequently,  Sancta  Sophia  reflects  less  of  univer- 
sality for  the  Patriarchs  then  do  the  basilicas  of  Santa 
Maria  Maggiore  or  the  cathedral  of  Chartres  for  the  successors 
of  Saint  Peter.  If  the  Greek  Church  did  not  put  forth  a 
new  bloom  of  stimulated  faith  by  penetrating  to  fresher  soils, 
its  first  source  of  nourishment  in  art  and  architecture  was 
very  rich.  The  Greek  world  over  which  Greek  Christianity 
assumed  power  as  its  most  potent  force  was  filled  with  wealthy 
cities  after  the  new  peace  sufficient  for  the  advanced  urban 
life  of  a settled  civilization  had  been  established  by  the 
generals  of  Alexander.  The  building  of  the  Hellenistic  cities 
were  essentially  Greek  in  the  classical  sense  of  building,  and 
consequently  merged  in  with  the  modified  basilica  brought  back 
to  the  East  by  the  Homan  conquerors.  Even  under  the  Roman 
Regime  there  was  no  very  great  change  either  in  style  or 
construction  to  be  noted.  Although  some  localities  such  as 
East  central  Syria  grew  no  timber,  the  Roman  builders  could 

import  timber  as  well  as  trained  men  for  their  architectural 

..  / 

activities.  De  Vogue,  who  seems  to  have  made  the  most  valu- 


able studies  in  the  architecture  of  Asia  Minor  and  Syria, 


i 


i 


V- 


remarks  that  the  builders  were  driven  in  the  later  period 
to  the  use  of  stone  exclusevely^ . This  meant  the  modificar- 
ticn  of  the  basilica  to  the  extent  of  making  it  support 
a roof  of  stone  slabs.  Arcades  of  a small  interval  took 
the  place  of  rafters;  consequently*  the  Syrian  building 
became  a framework  of  arches  and  its  walls  lost  their  chief 
function,  that  of  support.  This  modification  is  also 
true  in  the  temple  of  the  Spalato  palace.0  The  ceiling  of 
slabs,  carried  from  the  entablature  to  the  walls,  forms 
at  the  same  time  the  roof  of  the  building. 

So  far  as  there  is  a distinct  Syrian  style,  it  is 
entirely  the  result  of  this  influence  of  material.  The 
basilicas  used  at  first  were  shortened,  and  the  dome  be- 
came an  expedient  to  make  up  for  the  lack  of  wood.  The 
dome  brought  a new  problem,  however,  for  it  had  to  be  erected 
within  the  basilica  walls,  a construction  simplified  consider- 
ably when  the  parallelogram  of  the  basilica  was  shortened 


1 Immediately  to  the  south  of  Damascus  there  are  great  fields 
of  basalt,  from  which  material  was  quarried  in  abundance. 

It  is  here  that  many  cities  like  Zorah  and  Ezra  arose  in 
the  early  centuries  of  the  Christian  Era.  De  Vogue  "La 
Syrie  Centrale",  Geological  Maps,  page  118. 

2 Signor  Rivoira  declares  this  building  to  be  free  of  all 
Syrian  influence;  however,  Mr.  Jackson  quotes  M.  Stryzgowski ? 
M.  Charle  Diehl  does  likewise)  that  the  palace  was  erected 

by  Syrian  Greeks.  These  scholars  are  established  authorities, 
yet  the  viewpoint  of  Signor  Rivoira  and  of  M.  Stryzgowski  are 
one  hundred  and  eighty  degrees  apart.  The  palace  is  a 
very  important  building.  It  is  one  of  the  most  valuable 
"documents"  available  to  the  student  of  architectural  history. 


( 


i 


t 


S3 

into  the  square.  An  interesting  development  which  grew  out  of 
this  problem  and  out  of  the  expedients  sought  in  replace  the 
former  wooden  roof  construction  was  that  of  filling  the  corners 
of  the  basilica  with  masonry  in  order  to  bring  the  form  to  an 
octagon.  The  dome  was  then  erected  uoon  the  piers  of  a smaller 
octagon  built  within  the  larger.  At  Bosra  and  Ezra  (Zorah)  in 
the  Hauran,  there  are  two  notable  examples.  It  was  not  these 
innovations, however,  that  the  Greek  Church  wears  as  the  richest 
robe  of  her  glory  in  the  East  Roman  Empire.  The  vital  clue 
seems  from  the  farther  East.  The  old  Persian  method  was  to  erect 
a circular  dome  upon  a square  by  means  of  t romps  and  squinches. 

In  Syria,  where  the  problem  was  only  a moderate  one,  the  dome 
rested  upon  slabs  of  stone  laid  across  the  original  until  the 
square  became  a sedecimal  figure.  Merely  the  fact  that  the 
dome  was  constructed  in  the  Hauran,  however,  makes  the  art  of  this 
district  a penetrating  voice  acclaiming  the  influence  of  the 
East  upon  tne  West.  Whatever  structural  influence  from  the 
east  may  be  seen  in  the  Byzantine  architecture  must  have  crossed 
the  bridge  of  Syria.  At  once  the  most  striking  feature  of 
Persian  architecture  is  the  dome,  the  development  of  which  in. 

Syria  has  been  explained  as  a structural  expedient.  At  its 
development  in  characteristic  Persian  buildings  the  dome  stands 
in  height  at  least  a distance  equal  to  that  of  its  horizontal 
diameter;  the  top  is  extended  into  a point,  not  however,  like 
the  domes  of  the  Western  churches,  crowned  with  a lantern, 
there  are  very  few  openings,  and  there  is  a slight  indentation 
at  the  base.  Save  for  the  last  note,  the  domes  bear  a notable 
likeness  to  the  beehive  in  contour,  and  this  description  is 


. 


, 


■ 

■ 


■ 


' 


. . 

. 


3 


used  to  place  the  small  domed  huts  of  mud  to  be  found  in  Meso- 
potamia and  Persia  today,  probably  not  very  different  from 
those  of  remote  antiquity.  On  very  little  evidence,  some 
architects  have  undertaken  to  restore  Assyrian  ruins  upon 
the  dome  construction^ . The  greater  amount  of  evidence  from 
the  fifth  and  sixth  century  3.  C.  palace  cities  of  Persepolis 
and  Susa  do  not  show  the  use  of  the  dome;  on  the  contrary, 
these  buildings  are  remarkable  for  their  distinctly  western 
trabeate  construction  rather  than  for  their  testimony  to 
Oriental  forms  of  building.  The  Achaemenid  dynasty  which 
had  raised  these  cities  was  erased  by  Alexander  in  the  year 
331  B.  C.  and  the  Persian  Empire  then  passed  into  the  hands 
of  the  Seleucids.  There  are  no  ruins  dating  from  the  time 
of  the  Seleucid  dynasty  farther  east  than  North  Syria.  The 
Perthians,  subject  to  Persia  since  the  fifth  century  B.  C. , 
left  ruins  of  splendid  barbaric  structures  having  great 
vaulted  ceilings  like  that  of  El  Hadhi^ a place  west  of  the 
Kaleh  Snergat  ruin.  Great  building  a.ctivities  were  possible 
under  the  Sassanids,  who  supplied  a more  stable  government, 
beginning  323  A.  D.  At  Serbistan  and  Freouzabad  are  palaces 
of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  representing  a dome  style 
based  upon  the  Parthian  vaulted  ceiling  construction,  which 


1 Fergusson,  James,  "History  of  Architecture"  p 331,  Vcl. 

The  dome  appears  in  some  Assyrian  base  reliefs,  and  in 
some  Egyptian  paintings.  See  also  Bell,  Edward,  "The 
Architecture  of  Ancient  Egypt",  p 133. 


/y 

may  be  as  old  as  the  time  of  Trajan.  The  dome  development 
in  Syria  is  complete  about  the  sixth  century.  Indeed,  the 
Sancta  Sophie  standing  today  has  a dome  which  was  proba.bly 
recommended  by  that  erected  in  512  at  Bosra  or  that  of 
Zorah  completed  in  515,  for  the  reconstruction  of  Sancta 
Sophia  took  five  years,  and  it  was  finished  twenty-two  years 
after  the  cathedral  chuch  at  Zorah.  The  Persian  influence 
is  rather  strongly  implied  in  this  argument,  but  up  to  this 
time  there  can  be  no  more  structural  evidence  to  change  the 
implication  to  fact.  To  determine  completely  the  Persian 
element  in  Byzantine  architecture  through  decoration  requires 
much  more  primary  evidence  than  is  now  available  in  the  West. 

The  Roman  basilica  is  now  brought  down  from  its 

civic  purpose  in  its  primary  3tage,  through  the  modifications 

made  necessary  by  the  lack  of  wood  and  the  want  ofskilled 

builders  in  Syria.  Here  ene  has  Greece,  Rome,  and  the  Chris- 

/ 

tian  East,  - a composite  resume  of  three  civilizations,  an 
abortive  monstrosity  of  any  one  of  them.  There  is  neither 
a feeling  of  Greek  elegance  and  balance,  nor  the  more  emphatic 
Roman  richness  and  strength,  not  a3  yet  the  fullest  power  and 
solemnity  of  the  be3t  sixth  century  Christian  Church. 

The  mention  of  the  cathedral  churches  in  the  Hauran 
district  has  brought  this  account  down  to  the  sixth  of  our 
era,  at  which  time  the  pre-Moslem  architectural  development 
of  the  Syrian  country  comes  to  an  end.  One  may  net  pro  ceed 
farther  in  seeking  an  acquaintance  with  the  architecture  of 


the  East  Roman  Empire  without  turning  here  at  the  culmination 
of  its  constructive  Christian  life,  and  going  north  from 
Syria  to  visit  the  city  of  Constantinople.  That  wonderful 
and  important  city  entered  the  Christian  era  as  an  ancient 
metropolis,  containing  civil  buildings,  temples  and  palaces 
of  the  Graeco-Roman  architecture.  With  the  decline  of  Rome 

lOf 

in  the  fourth  century,  the  ancient  Byzantiri^  again  arose  to 
the  position  of  leadership  to  which  her  commanding  and  central 
position  gave  her  the  title.  The  year  that  Constantine  nomi- 
nated the  city  to  be  the  New  Rome,  his  mother,  remembered 
today  as  Saint  Helena,  secured  at  Jerusalem  very  important 
relics,  among  which  was  s portion  of  the  true  Gross.  This 
gift  magnified  the  importance  of  the  Partriar chate  of  Constanti- 
nople and  helped  to  make  the  city  the  ecclesiastical  as  well 
as  the  political  center  of  the  Eastern  Empire.  Probably  the 
relic  was  placed  by  Constantine,  to  whom  it  was  sent,  in  the 
treasure  of  one  of  the  former  pagan  temples  of  Byzantine,  some 
of  which  he  had  caused  to  be  rededicated  to  Christian  use.  A 
fifteenth  century  historian  suggests  this^. 

ttTheophanes,  Cedrenue,  Glycas,  Paul  the  Deacon,  Nice- 
phorus  CaJlistus  and  other  late  historians  agree  in  making 
Constantine  the  founder  of  the  first  church  dedicated  to  the 
Second  person  of  the  Trinity  as  Holy  Wisdom^" .It  is  not  des- 


1 It  is  almost  certain  that  the  present  Sancta.  Sophia,  that  of 
Justinian,  standing  on  the  summit  of  the  Acropolis  of  Byzant- 
ium, occupies  the  site  of  the  ancient  temple  cf  Pallas. 

2 Lethaby,  Quoting  Du  Cange,  "Descripto  Sanctae  Sophiae" 


cribed,  however,  Mr.  Lethaby  says  later  in  the  collaborated 
study  "Sancta  Sophia”,  in  the  De  vita  Constant  ini"  which  does, 
however,  describe  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Apostles^-  on  the 
fourth  hill  of  the  city.  Another  historian  has  Constant inus, 
the  third  son  of  the  emperor  Comstantine  as  the  builder  of 
the  great  church.  The  dedication  of  the  basilica  is  the  subject 
of  elaborate  accounts.  We  are  told  that  thirty-five  years 
after  "Constant inus  had  brought  many  offerings  of  gold,  and 
great  treasures  of  silver;  many  tissues  adorned  with  gold  thread 
and  stones  for  the  sanctuary,  the  roof  of  the  basilica  was 
destroyed  by  fire”.  This  tells  much  of  the  structure  of  the 
first  Sancta  Sophia.  It  is  significant  for  the  extent  to 
which  wood  was  used  by  the  architects  of  a Roman  emperor,  erect- 
ing a monumental  church  for  him  in  a city  long  filled  with 
splendid  and  famous  marble  palaces  and  temples  of  its  pagan 
centuries.  The  first  fire  came  in  the  reign  of  Theododius 
the  Great  (335);  twenty  years  later  it  was  again  damaged  by 
flames.  Upon  being  restored  and  rededicated  by  the  Empress 
Pul cher ia,  Sancta  Sophia  remained  uninjured  until  the  reign 
of  Justinia.n.  In  the  first  part  of  his  reign  occurred  the 
Nika  Renalt,  in  which  the  Church  was  burned.  This  was  in 


1 Built  to  contain  the  relics  of  Saint  Luke. 


If- 

January,  532.  It  is  the  Sancta  Sophia  of  his  reconstruction 
which  stands  today,  some  for  repairs  to  the  great  dome. 

The  architectural  remains  of  the  early  East  Roman 
Empire  do  not  offer  any  building  as  an  example  which  could  have 
inspired  in  themselves  the  structural  features  of  Justinian's 
new  church.  In  Salcnica,  the  Eski  Jami  is  undated,  but  is 
undoubtedly  of  the  early  fifth  century.  Saint  Demetrius' 
church  was  begun  about  eleven  years  after  the  dedication  Sancta 
Sophia  and  is,  like  the  Eski  Jami,  a basilica,.  In  the  same 
city  the  church  of  Saint  George  antedates  the  Eski  Jami,  and 
it  is  reminiscent  of  the  domed  church  at  Zorah  in  Syria.  The 
Sancta  Sophia  of  Salonica  mentioned  above  is  built,  to  be 
sure,  by  the  pendent! ve  construction,  but  the  work  is  im- 
perfect, and  looks  a9  if  the  architect  were  attempting  a 
form  of  construction  with  which  he  was  not  familiar1*  The 
church  is  a little  older,  it  is  thought,  than  the  Sancta  Sophia 
at  Constantinople. 

Of  the  churches  in  Constantinople,  that  of  Saint 
John  Studius,  founded  in  the  year  460  is  a basilica.  The 
"Little  Sancta  Sophia"  as  the  Turks  call  it,  is  even  later 
than  the  Sancta  Sophia  in  Salonica.  It  was  completed  in  527 
and  has  a dome  springing  directly  from  the  walls.  Thus  this 
church,  and  the  Salonica  churches  of  Saint  George  and  of 
Sancta  Sophia  recall  the  Roman  dome  buildings  in  general 
appearance,  and  the  Syrian  cathedrals  which  have  been  describ- 
ed in  construction  fully  as  much  as  they  resemble  the  "Envy 


1 Jackson, G.  T. "Byzantine  and  Romanesque  Architecture"  Chap  V. 


of  Solomon"  erected  by  Justinian. 

Sancta  Sophia  is  a building  the  chief  constructive 
feature  of  which  is  known  s.s  the  "spherical  pendentive" 

The  plan  centers  around  the'  four  great  piers  placed  at  the 
corners  of  a square.  From  the  top  of  each  pier  springs  an 
inverted  spherical  triangle  of  masonry,  whose  bases  form  a 
circle  by  their  juncture.  From  the  circumference  of  masonry 
rises  the  hemispherical  dome.  The  pendentives  are  portions 
of  what  is  really  an  imaginary  dome  built  over  the  entire 
square.  The  sides  are  sliced  off  even  with  the  piers  and 
the  top  is  removed  at  the  summit  of  the  arches  thus  created, 
leaving  the  four  masses  of  masonry  leaning  against  each  other 
for  support.  They  are  in  turn  supported  by  the  half  domes, 
one  built  up  against  the  east  and  one  against  the  west  arch 
respectively.  The  north  and  the  South  arches  are  filled 
with  three  superimposed  colonnades  and  a tympanum;  on  the  out- 
side  of!  the  piers  of  the  north  a„nd  south  arches  reenforcevd 
by  a great  buttress  which  today  stands  as  high  as  the  pier. 

Most  of  Sancta  Sophia  is  constructed  of  thin  brick  and  mortar, 
reenforced  in  the  piers  and  also  at  some  other  places  by  stone. 
A bout  one  half  of  the  aggregate  is  thought  to  be  mortar. 

After  the  mass  had  settled  raarbel  panels  of  the  interior  were 
put  up  by  means  of  bronze  clamps  and  resin. 

Probably  from  one  of  the  Turkish  minarets  the  church 
appears  to  be  a great  dome,  propped  on  the  east  and  the  west 
side  by  half  domes  ae  high  as  the  rim  of  the  hemisphere  which 


Jo 

they  support.  They  are  in  turn  each  propped  up  by  the  three 
smaller  domes  crowning  the  exedrae.  At  each  corner  under  the 
great  dome  is  an  immense  buttress  extending  out  the  exterior 
walls  of  the  church,  to  take  the  place  of  the  domes  on  those 
sides.  The  axis  of  these  butresses  is  at  right  angles  to  the 
axis  of  the  line  of  domes;  consequently  the  arrangement  in 
general  recalls  the  Greek  cross.  The  likness  is  accidental.  The 
corners  and  the  spaces  between  the  buttresses  are  each  of 
smaller  domes  and  some  barrel  vaulting.  The  whole  forming  a 
rectangle. 

Saneta  Sophia  is  probably  the  greatest  "structural" 
building  in  .the  world,  and  its  dependence  upon  structure  rather 
than  upon  decoration  for  impressiveness  is  augmented  oy  the 
remarkable  dimensions.  The  rectangle  of  the  outer  walls  extended 
about  245  feet  by  335  feet.  The  church  proper  is  a great  oval 
nave  within  the  rectangle  325  feet  from  the  door  of  the  exonar- 
thex  to  the  wall  of  the  central  exedra  of  the  bema.  The  width 
between  the  piers  mentioned  is  one  hundred  feet.  Formerly  there 
was  an  atrium  before  the  church  in  which  stood  the  famous  bronza* 
statue  of  Justinian.  One  enters  today  thru  the  exonarthex  into 
the  esonarthex,  passages  running  at  right  angles  to  the  nave,  and 
resembling  the  lobbies  of  the  modern  theatre.  The  inner  passage, 
rich  in  marbles,  gives  a hint  of  the  former  magnificence  of 
decorations.  It  is  a cross  vaulted  chamber  with  ceiling  cf 
mosaic,  and  the  walls  are  lined  with  beautiful  marbles  in  panels 
and  bands,  often  split  and  open  to  form  patterns. 

From  the  warmth  of  this  rich  hall  one  steps  into  the 
royal  doorway  in  the  center,  and  he  gazes  into  another  world, 


. 


■ 


■ 


- 


' 


one  unrelated  to  the  intimacy  of  the  esonarthexj there  is  a 

sudden  feeling  of  vast  space.  Distance  merges  the  red  and  the 

green  squares  of  the  pavement  into  Drown;  in  the  deep  vista 

there  seems  to  be  no  rift,  save  for  the  streamers  of  light.  They 

coax  the  vision  upward  and  it  rises  from  the  half  dome  above  to 

the  great  pendent ive  arch  against  which  it  leans,  thence  into 

tne  hemispherical  dome  above,  made  an  ethereal  ocean  of  light 

by  the  circle  of  windows  at  its  base.  Dimly  across  it  one  sees 

the  farther  naif  dome  and  lower  the  three  small  domes  of  the 

exedrae,  built  off  of  the  bema.  The  sight  is  a view  of  a vast 

pavement  under  a succession  of  canopies,  the  highest  over  the 

piers  in  the  center,  — all  in  a pyramid  ihass.  Here  there  is 

not  the  arrangement  of  bundles  of  harsh  lines  so  characteristic 

of  the  Gothic  cathedrals.  The  design  does  not  seem  to  close  in 

on  the  perspective  in  any  way,  for  the  cylindrical  walls  of  the 

bema  meet  the  piers  supporting  the  central  dome  in  the  form  of 

"columns,  standing  upon  the  floor,  which  are  not  placed  in  a 

straight  line,  but  arranged  with  an  inward  curve  of  semicircular 

1 

shape,  one  beyond  another,  like  dancers  in  a chorus."  The 
space  between  the  piers  on  the  north  and  south  sides  of  the 
square  is  also  filled  with  columns,  all  monoliths  of  green 
marble  taken,  as  it  is  said,  from  old  Rome  by  Constantine,  as 
likewise  were  those  leading  from  the  hemiscycle  in  which  we 
stand.  The  second  storey  in  this  space  is  a superimposed 
smaller  colonnade,  supporting  the  tympanum  under  the  pendentive 
arch.  The  tympanum  has  rows  of  small  windows.  There  are  many 

1 L\tha£ey  and  SiVc-inson.  "Santa  Sophia",  Chanter  III,  Poem  of 
Paul  the  Silentiary. 


'•  " ‘ fl  • 1 ■ • ,c*r  *»  B » s :>&  • . V,f  : it3S*0TA'< 

. 

■ 


. 


. 


windows  in  the  building  but  they  are  small,  and  the  walls  are 
very  thick.  The  circle  of  apertures  at  the  base  of  the  great 
dome  forms  a coronet  of  windows.  "The  Church  is  singularly 
full  of  light  and  sunshine;  you  would  declare  that  the  place  is 
not  lighted  from  without,  but  that  the  rays  are  produced  from 

t 

within  itself  such  abundance  of  light  pours  into  the  building.” 
The  walls  illuminated  in  this  happy  manner  are  lined  with  rich 
marbles  and  mosaics.  The  dome  was  once  plated  with  gold,  and 
the  precious  metals  and  jewels  were  used  plentifully  throughout 
the  decoration.  All  of  the  decorative  wealth  attested  to  by 
Russian  pilgrims  as  well  as  by  western  travellers  has  disappeared, 
being  carried  off  by  the  most  ^art  by  the  Frankish  Crusaders  in 
the  year  1304,  "That  part  of  the  church  which  is  especially 
sacred  and  which  the  priests  alcne  are  allowed  to  enter  which  is 
called  the  sanctuary  contains  forty  thousand  pounds  weight  of 
silver.”  ”Mcreover,  it  is  impossible  accurately  to  describe  the 

gold,  silver  and  gems  presented  by  the  Emperor  Justinian  

I leave  the  rest  to  be  inferred.” 

To-day,  bereft  of  jewels,  the  furniture,  the  incense,  the 
music,  the  priest  and  the  worshipper,  all  of  which  belongs;  to  its 
atmosphere,  Sancta  Sophia  is  still  impressive  and  rich.  The 
interior,  thanks  to  the  ”rest oration"  by  Fossati  in  1877  again 
receives  the  light  of  the  corona,  on  the  walls  of  gold  glass  and 
plaques  of  rich  marbles.  Columns  of  porphyry  from  the  same 
mines  which  supplied  the  Theban  temples  was  brought  from  Egypt 
to  form  part  of  the  colonnades,  The  eight  verde  antique  columns 
in  the  nave  are  said  to  be  of  Molcssian  marble,  thus  denying 

/.  sSojnia  - 

& tv 


* 


. 

t 


. 

. 


. 


J* 

Old  Rome  as  tlieir  home.  They  seem  to  have  come  from  Thessaly, 
altho  still  another  account  reports  them  from  Ephesus.  Blocks 
of  it  were  placed  alternately  with  the  deep  rosy  brecciated 
marble  from  Phrygia.  Spartan  porphyry  was  used  along  with 
"Marmor  NuMidium"  ’’stone  nutured  in  the  hills  of  the  Moors, 
crocus  coloured,  glittering  like  gold”  in  the  coarser  mosaic,  the 
opus  sectile.  Gray  Proconnesian  marble  was  used  for  tne  columns, 
capitals  and  as  frames  for  the  richer  marbles.  Another  gray  marble 
was  quarried  in  Euboeia,  sometimes  of  a ’’beautiful  greenich  white 
surface,  marked  with  broad  wavy  lines  of  green  or  purple  gray”. 

H 

Xierapolis  contributed  a variegated  red  marble,  and  the  white 
and  black  red  stone  of  Iassian  formed  the  phiale  (cantharos?) 
black  marble  from  Spain,  "Marmor  Celticum"  having  white  veins 
was  used  in  some  parts  of  the  nave,  large  sections  of  which 
were  covered  with  slabs  of  honey  coloured  Egyptian  alabaster. 

Over  these  rich  walls  were  vaults  and  domes  of  gold  glass. 

The  esemble  effect  is  one  dominated  by  reds,  browns,  and 
gold.  The  green  of  the  columns  and  the  dark  shadows  behind  them 
emphasize  the  strength  of  the  colour  scheme,  the  mosaics  enrich 
it,  and  the  sunshine  from  the  circlet  of  windows  glorifies  the 
whole.  Byzantine  art  has  greatness.  Its  stately  mosaic 
compositions  are  magnificently  decorative.  Beautiful  colours 
are  combined  in  balanced  schemes  showing  a genius  for  colour 
values . 

Most  of  the  quotations  used  in  this  description  are  from 
the  architectural  epic  of  Paul  the  Silentiary,  used  by  Salzen- 
berg  in  working  out  the  restoration  for  Abdul  Mesjid  with  Fossati. 
The  effect  of  the  richness  seems  to  be  still,  as  this  chronicler 


' 


, 

. 


■ 


. 


J' 


said,  beyond  the  potentiality  of  speech, 

"Whither  am  I carried?  What  breeze  has  driven,  like  the 

shin  at  area,  my  errant  speech?  ....  Return,  my  Muse  to  see  the 

1 

wonders  scarcely  to  be  believed  when  seen  or  heard." 

The  costliness  is  taxation  and  social  suffering  must 
all  have  seemed  repaid  at  the  Christmas  dedication  in  the  year 
53?,  the  eleventh  year  of  Justinian's  reign.  It  has  been  about 
seven  hundred  years  since  "the  most  interesting  building  of 
the  world's  surface  was  plundered  by  the  rough  soldiers  of  the 
fourth  Crusade,  but  it  is  still  a pinnacle  in  architecture  and 
Christian  art.  Byzantine  art  is  a creative  art.  "L'  art  c'est 

t 

d'etre  absolument  soi-meme",  quotes  M.  Llthaby,  Though  robbed 
of  her  wealth,  the  church  is  no  ruin;  still  stately  and  vast, 
Sanct  Sophia  is  one  of  the  greatest  existing  monuments  of 
art  to  faith.  It  is  the  ancient  basilica,  expressing  a more 
than  Roman  power;  its  attractiveness  is  entirely  foreign  to  the 
intellectual  beauty  of  Greek  art.  Its  connotive  spirit  is 
Hebraic.  It  nas  a literary  equivalent  in  Isiaah.  "Thou  shalt 
not  behold  beauty  unless  thou  enterest  within  me;  thou  shalt 
not  enjoy  felicity  unless  thou  enterest  within  me". 

Any  dozen  mosques  in  Constantinople  today  testify  to 
the  dominant  impression  made  by  Sanct  Sophia  upon  the  Turks. 

They  have  destroyed  most  of  the  other  churches  of  Justinian  in 
order  to  repeat  his  architectural  wonder,  yet  the  Greeks  gave  up 
this  style  of  church.  Saint  Mark's  in  Venice  is  a model  of  the 
next  building  erected  by  Anathemius  and  Isadorus  in  Constanti- 


1 Lethaby  and  Swain,  "SanCta  Sophia"  Paul  the  Silentiary. 


i 

' 


; .. 


. 

' 


nople.  The  buildings  at  Parenzo  and  Ravenna  are  Byzantine  in 
decoration,  though  not  quite  so  closely  in  construction. 


"Byzantine"  meaning  now  any  structure  built  in  conformation  to 
Sancta  Sophia.  The  icon  oclastic  controversies  (726-824) 
dispersed  Byzantine  art  over  western  Europe.  At  Aacnen  it  has 
decorated  the  church  of  Charlemagne,  and  adorned  the  Carolingian 

Renaissance,  in  Rome  it  left  churches,  — Greek  court 

1 

ceremonial  in  the  Vatican.  In  Constantinople,  after  the 
beginning  of  the  second  "Golden  Age"  there  were  general  changes 
in  plan  treatment  and  decoration.  The  Greek  cross  plan  of  "La 
Nea"  a church  erected  by  Basil  I becomes  the  model.  It  was  a 
period  of  place  and  provincial  church  building  in  Greece  and 
Armenia,  and  the  period  extends  up  to  about  1304.  St.  Marks 

/ 3 

Wci.s  raised  in  1204,  the  Byzantine  church  of  Perigueiu^  in  France 

in  1130,  and  the  two  Athenian  churches  about  1250.  The  palace 

of  Blachernae  and  the  walls  of  Manuel  Comnenus  are  both  about 

1143.  The  date  of  the  end  of  the  period  and  its  relation  to 

Saint  Mark's  cathedral  is  obvious.  The  Venetian  sense  of  humor 

could  tolerate  the  application  of  the  old  adage  of  "robbing 

Peter  to  pay  Paul"  to  Saint  Luke  and  their  own  patron. 

In  spite  of  this  disaster,  building  of  worth  and 

originality  went  on  in  Serbia,  in  the  Peloponeseus,  and  the 

3 

vas  sal  city  of  Trebizcnd.  There  were  changes  in  decoration 
which  belied  any  charge  of  degeneracy.  The  treatment  became 
vertical  outside  and  inside  suggesting  very  distinctly  a Gothic 
influence.  Pattern  in  brick  to~k  the  place  of  expensive  mosaic. 


1 "The  Vatican"  part  IV;  section  by  Paul  Maria  Baumgarten. 

2 gjmball  and  Edgell  "A  History  of  Architecture,  Fig.  85,91,  and 


. >.  on 

•*. 

. 


The  result  has  a virile  appearance  and  is  less  rich  than  the 
decoration  of  the  first  "Golden  Age",  and  it  is  usually  the 
designation  as  the  style  of  tne  Byzantine  Renaissance.  The 
new  palaces  and  churches  resemble  the  Romanesque  fortreas  like 
buildings,  however;  the  city  was  losing  its  political  power 
and  consequently  much  of  its  wealth.  The  brilliance  of  its 
scientists,  scholars  and  artists  and  the  vitality  of  an  art 
acting  as  a dymanicforce  from  Constantine  or  the  Palaeologi  was 
not  enough.  It  has  a great  negative  compensation  in  the 
political  chicanery  inflicted  upon  the  dwindling  Empire.  The 
Turkish  conquerors  had  good  reason  to  despise  the  Bysantines  with 
whom  they  came  in  contact.  It  was  not,  consequently  the 
Renaissance  nor  the  revival  in  the  second  "Golden  Age"  under 
Basil,  but  the  first  "Golden  Age"  the  age  of  Justinian  of 
Sancta  Sophia  which  the  barbarian  Turks  thought  superior,  and 
which  they  have  preserved  until  today. 

With  the  painful  dissipation  of  the  formerly  high  esteem 
of  the  Palaeologi,  and  the  decay  of  their  political  strength 
and  of  Byzantine  resources,  the  matter  of  Ottoman  architecture 
has  little  to  do  that  is  pertinent.  The  shameless  mutilation 
of  Constantinople’s  artistic  wealth  is  as  much  a reproach  to 
the  dynasty  as  is  its  falsity  to  subjects  and  enemies  alike. 

The  Palaeologi  lived  in  delicate  suspense  on  the  past  glory 
of  their  city. 

If  the  structures  of  the  Byzantine  Renaissance  were 
passed  over  by  the  untrained  eyes  of  the  Ottoman,  it  is  less 
true  that  he  had  before  ignored  a pleasing  and  commendable 
manner  of  building  for  the  same  reason.  The  Arab  conquests 


■ 

- 

. 


. 


5 


. 


Jl 

of  Persia  and  Asia  Minor  in  the  eighth  oentury  had  given  the  lands 
under  the  law  of  the  Koran  an  architectural  unity,  and  the  ability 
of  the  Seljuk  in  the  architecture  of  south  Asia  Minor  had 
subsequently  offered  excellent  models  of  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
architecture.  The  Ottoman  Turks,  however,  concieved  a great 
tribal  dream  after  their  migration  into  the  old  Roman  province 
of  Bithynia,  handed  over  to  them  by  the  Seljuk  Turks.  This 
dream,  together  with  their  rude  state  of  culture,  explains  the 
primitive  architecture  in  their  first  permanent  home.  They  had 
very  early  chosen  the  grey  dome  of  Sancta  Sophia,  seen  across 
the  strait  which  separated  their  province  from  the  continent  of 
Europe. as  an  ideal;  and  when  they  reached  the  city  as  conquerors, 
no  other  building  offered  so  admirable  a model.  As  the  Arabs 
and  Seljuks  had  possessed  the  wisdom  of  developing  whatever 
manner  of  building  they  found  in  their  conquests,  so  the 
Ottoman  adopted,  rather  than  created.  Fcran  understanding  of 
this  trait  and  its  operation,  one  must  examine  briefly,  at  least, 
the  origin  and  the  nature  of  the  Ottoman  Turks. 


, 

■ . u . 


THE  OTTOMAN  TURKS;  THEIR  COMING  INTO  THE  BYZANTINE  WORLD. 


The  Turkish  people  spring  from  the  primary  group  known  to 
ethnological  nomenclature  as  Turanian.  Coming  as  they  do  more 
precisely,  as  a subdivision  of  the  better  known  Mongols,  the 
Turks  in  their  purer  state  resemble  the  Mongols  in  many  respects 
indeed,  almost  every  group  of  Asian  people  share  this  resemblanc 
and  in  Turanian  physiognomy,  if  not  in  language,  there  is  a 
unity  combining  the  people  of  Cambodia  and  korea  with  those  of 
Findland. 

The  Mongols  have  their  original  home  in  a stretch  of 
plain  country  lying  north  of  the  desert  of  Gobi,  and  between  the 
Altai  mountains  and  the  Kingham  range.  Across  this  barrier  to 
the  east  dwell . the  Mancnus.  To  the  west  of  the  Altai  hills 
lies  the  country  of  the  Kirghiz,  the  Naimans,  the  Uigurs,  and 
other  tribes.  These  names  apply  as  much  to  general  pasture 
lands  as  to  the  home  of  any  settled  political  entity.  The  name 
"Sioux”  on  a map  expresses  to  us  the  equivalent  to  Kirghiz  or 
Sibur.  To  the  north  the  Mongols  found  no  great  incentive  for 
considerable  expansion,  and  there  lay  to  the  south  a desert  the 
extent  of  which,  while  not  impassable,  was  formidable  even  to 
the  nomad.  The  Kingham  range  borders  the  pastures  and  the  Gobi 
desert  on  the  east,  and  extends  a formidable  wall  north  along 
the  east  of  the  Mongol  country  to  the  Amur  river.  The  ranges  of 
the  Altai  hills,  however,  lie  in  a somewhat  east  and  west 


. 


. 


. 


: 


direction.  From  their  capital  near  the  east  entrance  of  the 
principal  parses  the  Mongols  poured  out  on  tneir  tribal  mi- 
grations to  the  southward,  passing  along  the  well-watered  upland 
pastures  of  the  west  slope  of  the  Tien-Shan  mountains. 

Once  the  Altais  prooably  offered  sufficient  fertile 
pasturage  for  tne  Mongol  herds,  but  the  pressure  of  numbers 
determined  a cycle  of  migrations.  To  the  extent  of  these  shift - 
ings  there  was  hardly  a limit  save  endurance  and  defeat  in 
battle.  From  the  Altai  hills  west  to  the  sandy  river  plains  of 
Prussia  there  lay  nearly  four  thousand  miles  of  comparatively 
level  country,  covered  in  the  northern  portion  by  tne  forests 
of  Russia  and  Siberia,  but  which  opens  up  at  about  the  sixtieth 
parallel  to  the  plains,  known  from  the  Russian  name  as  the 
"steppe"  country.  This  area  is  the  goal  of  the  nomad  tribes  of 
Asia,  and  they  attempt  to  press  into  its  richland  warm  regions 
of  the  Crimea,  the  Caucasus  and  Khwarism  as  the  Teutonic  peoples 
had  swarmed  earlier  into  Italy. 

The  civilization  of  the  Mediterranean  world,  as  well  as 
that  flourishing  in  the  rich  but  inadequately  protected  valley 
of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  has  always  been  conscious  of  its 
possible  destruction  by  these  barbaric  horsemen  of  the  northern 
plains.  Their  few  appearances  in  the  southwest  of  Asia  have 
left  memories  of  gigantic  catastrophes  in  history,  and  in  the 
affairs  of  men  the  invasions  have  seemed  only  less  terrible 
than  a convulsion  of  nature.  They  advance  with  the  ever 
widening  wings  of  a prairie  fire,  and  they  are  not  more  merciful 
than  fire  to  whatever  civilization  may  be  the  in  path. 

From  the  thirteenth  century  invasions  of  the  Mongols,  the 


i 3 

' 


-4 


‘ 

- 

■ 

‘ 


1 


‘ 


the  West  was  poorly  fitted  to  defend  itself.  The  Mongols  had 
at  this  time  not  only  unity,  but  genius  to  guide  their  expansion. 
Between  the  years  1206  and  1227,  Ghengiz-khan  had  directed  the 
activities  of  hi3  main  armies,  and  with  the  aid  of  his  brilliant 
generals  had  taken  under  his  control  all  of  Asia  save  Siam, 

India  and  the  Arabian  desert.  From  China,  subdued  in  1204,  he 
came  to  the  Oxus  country  and  into  Persia.  The  duplicity  of  the 
Khwarismian  shah  was  responsible  for  the  destruction  of  south- 
western Arabia.  Ghengis-khan  had  hoped  to  avoid  trouble  with 
him. 

His  defeat  laid  open  to  the  Mongols  all  of  Persia.  With 

his  Chinese  engineers  and  his  seven  hundred  thousand  horsemen 

he  beseiged  cities  from  the  Caspian  Sea  to  the  Indus  River,  but, 

like  Alexander,  he  had  taken  his  troops  too  far  into  India,  and 

found  it  wiser  to  return  home.  He  died  in  1227. 

Hi 3 four  sons,  who  were  at  the  head  of  his  respective 

armies,  were  exhorted  to  finish  the  subjugation  of  China,  which 

they  finally  accomplished  in  1279.  In  the  distribution  of  the 

Mongol  tribes  which  followed  the  sweep  of  their  armies,  the 

conquests  to  the  west  and  south,  are  more  illuminating.  The 

conquest  of  Russia,  Poland  and  Hungary  was  begun  in  1235  by  an 

1 

expedition  of  five  hundred  thousand  men.  "and  in  less  than  six 

years  they  had  measured  a line  of  ninety  degrees  of  longitude, 

2 

a fourth  part  of  the  circumference  of  the  earth."  Even  a 


1 Gibbon,  Edward  "The  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Rodman  Empire" 
Vol.  7,  Cnapter  LXIV  page  15. 

2 An  illuminating  note  in  both  the  Hakluyt  publication  of 
Rub ruck's  travels,  and  also  in  Gibbon,  says  that  the  &ear 
of  the  Mongols  halted  the  Baltic  commerce,  as  a result  of 

which  there  was  great  reduction  in  the  nr ice  scale  of  the 
English  fish  markets. 


id 

.( 

i 

, 

. 


t 


31' 

group  of  Knights  Templar  came  to  help  oppose  their  inroad  into 
Silesia,  but  at  Leignitz  (1341)  they  turned  south  of  their 
own  accord  to  trample  the  Hungarian  Plain.  Hungary  and  the 
kingdoms  of  Serbia,  Bosnia  and  Bulgaria  were  also  overrun 
rapidly,  and  Russia,  at  least,  has  not  yet  fully  recovered  from 
tne  devastation. 

The  invasions  to  the  south,  however,  brought  changes  very 
important  to  subsequent  history.  The  Saracen  Empire  as  well  a3 
the  many  Seljuk  states  were  shattered,  so  that  immigration  of 
nomads  which  came  in  found  flattery  rather  than  opposition. 

Bagdad  and  Anatolia  were  taken  and  Egypt  threatened.  Yet  such 
distant  conquests  served  more  for  vanity  than  for  power  to  the 
Khan  living  on  the  border  of  China,  and  whose  great  problem  was 
the  acquisition  of  that  Empire.  The  lesser  Khans  were  gradually 
left  the  control  of  the  Kirghiz,  Russia,  Transoxonia  and  Iran, 
and  they  soon  found  themselves  capable  of  declaring  their 
independence,  assuming  at  the  same  time  the  law  of  the  Pr-phet. 

The  Khans  of  Iran  were  content  to  leave  the  Seljuk  states  of 
Asia  Minor  to  their  own  struggles. 

Throughout  the  conquest  of  Persia  the  Mongols  had  been 
opposed  by  Jelaladin,  the  son  of  that  sultan  of  Khwarism  whom 
Chengiz-khan  had  thought  it  necessary  to  annihilate.  The 
Khwarismian  forces  had  long  been  recruited  from  the  tribes  of 
Asia  which  had  found  their  way  into  the  Oxus  country.  Among 
these  recruits  were  various  tribes  of  Turks,  a minor  branch 
of  the  Mongol  people.  The  death  of  Jeleladin  disbanded  his 
Turkish  allies,  and  their  venturesome  nature  led  different  groups 
into  Syria  and  Asia  Minor.  The  Turks  who  were  to  take 


f 


' 

^ — v 30 1 .s  ' j I 


. 

■ 


. 


' 


- 


. ' 


. 


j 


v- 


Constantinople  w re  one  of  these  tribes,  the  Ottoman  Turks, 

who  had  taken  services  under  the  Seljuk  Sultan  of  Iconium  about 
1320.  Their  chieftain  was  assigned  a position  in  the  ancient 
Greek  province  of  Bithynia,  and  on  Sangar  River  the  tribe 
pitched  their  four  hundred  tents. 

The  Ottoman  immediately  began  his  remarkable  expansion. 

There  were  no  strong  forces  of  opposition,  for  tne  Seljuk  dynasty 
had  lost  its  power  through  Mongol  war  and  internal  dissipation 
of  strength,  while  on  the  north  the  Byzantine  Empire  was  in  full 
turmoil  of  the  political  dissention  that  became  its  ruin. 

Considering  the  nature  of  these  two  civilizations,  the 
Greek  ancient,  and  long  the  center  of  the  highest  culture  of  the 
world;  the  Seljuk  and  Saracenic  brilliant  and  rich,  it  is 
baffling  to  acknowledge  the  supremacy  of  the  Turkish  shepherds. 
Their  civilization  has  been  compared  to  that  of  the  North 
American  Plains  Indians,  but  it  was  probably  somewhat  higher. 

Since  pre-Christian  times  they  had  been  under  very  direct 
Chinese  influence,  and  had  been  receptive  to  the  military 
virtues  of  obedience  and  endurance  under  their  suzerainty.  Their 
tribal  wanderings  were  under  the  complete  control  of  the  khan  and 
the  organization  tnu3  formed  partook  of  the  nature  of  a state 
in  arms  seeking  a temporary  home.  The  numerical  range  of 
fighting  men  was  from  a few  dozen  to  about  seven  hundred  thousand. 

The  wealth  which  upheld  this  primitive  state  consisted  of 
goats,  cattle,  sheep  and  horses,  "et  surtout  en  chevaux",  Baron 
D'Ohsson  goes  on  to  say,  "fournassaient  a leur  subsistence  et 
composaient  toute  leur  richesse".  The  horses  furnished  some- 
thing else,  however,  than  food  and  a basis  for  exchange,  and 


i 


* 

■ 

' 

. 

■ 

- 


' 


. 

. 

i 


that  was  transportation,  it  was  the  swiftness  of  the  invasions 
as  well  as  the  primitive  fearlessness  of  the  men  that  made  the 
Mongols  and  their  allies  the  terror  of  southwestern  Asia. 

The  riches  of  nomads  is  nearly  all  alike,  and  their  small 
commerce  therefor,  was  carried  on  with  a peoole  of  a more 
advanced  degree  of  culture.  The  commodities  carried  to  Chengiz- 
khan  before  his  conquests  serve  as  a significient  illustration 
to  indicate  the  primitive  exchange,  and  differ  very  little  from 
that  carried  on  in  the  day3  of  Strabo,  who,  writing  of  the 
tribes  then  near  the  mouth  of  the  Don,  says  that  they  brought 
slaves,  furs  and  various  products  of  native  industry  while  the 

Greeks  imported  principally  tissues  and  wine”,  a frontier 

Indian  trading  post. 

Their  houses  were  felt  tents,  and  for  facility  in 
migration  to  winter  and  summer  camps,  were  fitted  out  very 
simply.  Pictures  of  their  modern  dwellings  show  them  to  be 
erected  upon  the  ground,  but  William  of  Rubruck  says  that  he 
saw  Tartar  houses  upon  carts  whose  wheels  were  twenty  feet  apart. 
"I  have  myself  counted  to  one  cart  twenty-two  oxen  drawing  one 
house,  eleven  abreast  across  the  width  of  the  cart,  and  the 
other  eleven  before  them.  The  axle  of  the  cart  was  as  large  as 
the  mast  of  a ship,  and  one  man  stood  in  the  entry  of  the  house, 
driving,”  Such  a stage  of  civic  development  will  explain  to  a 
far  greater  extent  than  the  accusation  of  inertia  or  the  lack 
of  ability  why  the  Turks  of  Constantinople  have  been  willing  to 
accept  the  dwellings  of  that  city  as  they  found  them,  and  it  is 
also  one  explanation  why  to-day  no  man  knows  his  street  or 
number  there,  but  designates  his  residence  by  its  proximity  to 


■ 


I 


• . 

: 

: .. 


to  a certain  fountain  or  coffee  house,  and  its  district  as  the 

'•Coral"  or  "The  Thick  Beard";  the  "E^ts  no  Meat"  or  the  "Sleeps 
1 

by  Day." 

The  decoration  of  the  huts  is  carried  out  on  the  water- 
proofing ground  of  tallow,  whitened  with  chalk  or  white  clay, 
in  various  primitive  designs.  Sometimes  the  felt  is  dyed  black, 
and  is  striped  in  white  in  the  universal  zigzag  lightening 
design.  They  used  also  designs  of  birds,  beasts,  vines  and 
flowers.  The  settlement  of  one  knan  on  the  rich  man  seemed 
like  a large  town,  although  there  will  be  very  few  men  in  it. 
Each  wife  has  a large  dwelling,  "exclusive  of  the  smaller  little 
ones  which  they  set  up  after  the  big  one,  and  which  are  like 
little  closets  in  which  sewing  girls  live."  The  plan  of  an 
audience  tent  shows  a very  strict  separation  of  men  and  women. 
This  is  adhered  to  in  Mongolia  to-day,  and  formed  the  b^sis  of 
the  etiquette  at  the  Manchu  Court.  It  may  also  possibly  lend 
itself  to  explain  the  segregation  of  women  in  modern  Turkish 
society,  along  with  the  inheritance  of  such  Byzantine  customs 
at  the  use  of  the  gynaeceuin,  or  the  orthodox  Moslem  position 
assigned  to  women.  Whatever  influence  the  tribal  custom  may 
have  had  in  the  later  limitation  of  the  activities  of  Turkish 
women,  the  limitation  in  the  nomadic  state  did  not  prevent 
domestic  activity  of  a useful  sort.  A diagram  of  the  great 
houses  of  the  Altai  Tatars  is  divided  evenly,  and  the  east  half 

they  were  always  orientated  to  the  south  were  for  the 

women,  for  their  dances  as  well  as  their  labor. 

The  worship,  before  conversion  to  Buddhism,  Nest orianism. 


1 Dwight,  H.  D.  "Constantinople  Old  and  New",  page  3. 


■ 


l 

' 


3 5 

Latin  Christianity  or  to  Islam  was  that  of  the  ancestors,  and 

natural  personification,  with  a strong  place  held  by  natural 

magic.  The  influence  of  tne  great  faiths  mentioned  contributed 

the  monotheistic  conception  and  a notable  religious  freedom,  so 

that  by  the  time  of  Ghingiz-khan  there  was  a situation  by  no 

mea^s  sterile  of  lessons  to  Eurpoe,  which,  "defending  nonsense 

by  cruelty,  might  have  been  confounded  by  the  example  of  a 

barbarian  wno  anticipated  the  lessons  of  philosophy  and 

established  by  his  laws  a system  of  free  theism  and  perfect 

toleration In  the  Mosque  of  Bokhara,  the  insolvent  victor 

might  trample  the  Koran  under  his  horses  feet,  but  the  calm 

legislator  respected  the  prophets  and  pontiffs  of  the  most 

1 

hostile  sects."  Superstition,  nevertheless  held  and  still  holds 
an  important  place  in  directing  the  activities  of  the  Turk, 
and  in  his  earlier  days,  religion  as  a body  of  doctrine  rode 
lightly  upon  his  shoulders. 

This  fidelity  to  law,  however,  is  a commendable 
characteristic  of  the  Turkish  people,  disclosed  constantly 
throughout  recorded  knowledge  of  them.  First,  to  be  sure,  it 
was  as  represented  by  the  absolute  decision  of  the  khan,  but 
even  under  an  astute  a leader  as  the  swift  Timur,  there  was 
time  for  deliberation  and  the  recording  of  decision.  "And 
when  my  councillors  and  advisors  were  assembled  together,  I 
demanded  their  opinion  on  the  good  and  the  evil,  and  on  the 
advantages  and  on  the  disadvantages  of  undertaking  or  re- 


1 Gibbon,  Edward, "The  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire  "Vol. 
7,  Chapter  LXIV,  page  4. 


' 

' 

. 


. 


3 L 


linquiehing  the  enterprise  oefore  us.  And  when  I had  heard 

their  opinions  thereon,  I myself  examined  both  sides  of  their 

opinions.  And  I duly  weighed  the  advantages  and  the  disadvantages 

and  I considered  the  perils  thereof  with  the  eye  of  attention. 

And  in  every  plan  in  which  I found  a twofold  hazard  I rejected; 

1 

and  I chose  that  in  which  the  peril  was  single.”  The  wisdom 

of  deliberation  w as  proven  by  trie  constant  success  of  Timur's 

arms,  and  it  is  as  true  of  Timur  as  of  the  earlier  Turks  that 

the  seat  of  the  council  floor  was  no  attraction  from  the  field 
3 

of  battle. 

The  rise  of  the  Mongols  and  Turks  under  Ghengiz-khan  had 
been  as  phenomenal  as  the  rise  of  the  Arabs  under  Mohammed  and 
his  apostles.  In  such  a sudden  bloom  a people  may  learn  much, 
but  what  they  pick  up  by  contact  is  little  more  than  gloss  over 
their  heredity.  Accordingly  Ala-ad  Din,  in  placing  the  vigorous 
and  wily  tribesmen  of  Ertoghrul  far  away  from  their  wandering 
relatives  in  south  Asia  Minorand  Syria  began  one  of  those 
collossal  cancers  of  history  which  serve  to  delay  the  progress 


1 Timur  the  Great,  "Institutes”  Daniel  Strqat  Calcutta,  1765. 

(Book  I,  p.7) 

2 "And  when  night  was  come,  I pitched  my  tents  on  the  ground 
where  I was  and  I consulted  with  myself  that  I would  not  let 
the  plan  of  battle  cool,  but  that  I would  charge  quick  and 
hot  on  the  army  of  Ouleous  Khaiyeh:  and  they  were  near  thirty 
thousand. 

And  I considered  that  I was  guilty  of  delay,  something  might 
come  to  pass  which  might  cause  me  to  stand  in  need  of  alliance. 
And  although  Amir  Hussein  was  encamped  behind  me,  I did  not 
caude  myself  to  stand  in  need  of  his  support:  but  by  skillful 
measures  I defeated  the  force  of  Ouleous  Khaiyeh,  and  the  men 
of  Jitteh”  Supra,  page  91. 


' 


. 

: 


■ — : ■ - 

of  evolution  and  at  the  same  time  to  magnify  the  problem  of 
evil.  For  in  removing  danger  from  the  Seljuk  kingdom  by  bribing 
the  Turks  with  the  rich  Greek  province,  Ala-ad-Din  not  merely 
postponed  for  a snort  time  the  end  of  his  own  dynasty,  but 
enacted  the  decisive  step  for  the  political  extinction  of  the 
Byzantine  Empire,  and  much  of  its  culture.  Ten  years  before  his 
death  he  saw  the  grandson  of  Ertoghrul  enter  the  Byzantine 
province  of  Nicomedia,  and  also  acquire  the  city  of  Brusa  for 
a new  capital. 

Orchan  adorned  the  city  with  a mosque,  a hospital  and  an 

important  college;  he  adopted  a coinage  system  and  reformed  the 

military  force.  With  these  he  soon  extended  his  lands  to  the 

Hellespont  and  the  Bosporus.  By  1313  the  Asiatic  provinces  of 

tne  Byzantine  Empire  were  lost  to  Orchan.  no  carried  on 

excursions  across  tne  Bosporus,  1356-1358  and  at  the  same  time 

defended  his  provinces  against  a Latin  Crusade,  disposing  of 

the  danger  from  Constantinople  for  the  moment  by  a royal 

marriage.  The  Greeks,  however,  were  reduced  to  the  situation 

of  even  permitting  Orchan  to  sell  his  Christian  slaves  in 
1 

Constantinople. 

An  earthquake  and  tne  weakness  of  Cantacuzene  tolerated  the 
sojurn  of  a Turkish  colony  in  the  Chersonese,  but  the  power  of 
Murad  I 1360-1389  made  their  stay  permanent.  Five  years  later 
he  removed  to  Adrian ople  in  Thrace,  and  he  reduced  the  Balkan 
kingdoms  by  1385.  Under  his  son  Bajazet  I the  domains  of  the 
Greeks  shrank  and  those  of  the  Ottoman  were  increased  until  the 
Roman  world  was  now  contracted  to  a corner  of  Thrace  between 


1 Gibbon,  Edward  Vol.  7,  Chapter  LXIV,  p 41. 


. 


. 


. 

• . - 


. a 


' 


j6- 

the  Proponti3  and  the  Black  Sea  a space  of  ground  not  mors 
extensive  than  the  lesser  principalities  of  Germany  or  Italy  if 
the  remains  of  Constantinople  had  not  represented  the  wealth  and 
population  of  the  Empire.  Bajazet  could  have  taken  the  city, 
but  he  was  persuaded  that  suen  a move  would  have  been  unwise,  and 
in  playing  off  a pretender  to  the  Byzantine  throne,  the  sultan 
had  arranged  with  him  that  the  city  was  to  be  surrendered.  In 
1440,  the  advent  of  Timur  gave  the  city  a temporary  relapse  from 
the  pressure  of  the  Turks.  Civil  war  succeeded  tne  alien  ruin 
of  the  Ottoman  Empire,  and  it  was  not  until  twenty  years  after 
the  rise  of  Timur  that  Murad  II  succeeded  in  reestablishing  the 
union  of  his  grandfathers  disjointed  provinces. 

For  ten  years  before  his  withdrawal  into  Asia,  Bajazet  I 

1 

had  kept  the  city  practically  in  astate  of  siege,  and  Murad  II 
resumed  the  investment,  attracting  there  from  Asia  crowds  of 
Moslems  desirous  of  Martyrdom.  In  Brusa  the  Greeks  created  a 
domestic  revolt,  and  there  was  after  its  suppression  a respite 
to  Constantinople  of  thirty  years.  When  it  was  ended  by  Mohanned 
II,  the  E«*st  Homan  Empire  came  to  an  end,  so  that,  as  the  Turks 
thought,  the  dream  of  Othman  might  be  fulfilled,  and  the  crescent 
take  the  place  of  the  cross  upon  the  grey  dome  of  Sancta  Sophia. 


1 Foord,  Edward,  "The  Byzantine  Emoire."  Cnapter  XIX,  p 387. 

Gibbon,  Edward,  "The  Devlin  and  Fall  of  tne  Roman  Emoire", 
Vol.  7,  Chapter  LXIV. 


' 


' 


> • « .. 


THE  GENERAL  STATE  OF  CULTURE  UNDER  THE  LATER  EMPIRE 


No  brief  account  can  hope  to  picture  an  adequate  panorama 
of  Byzantine  society  in  the  XV  century,  but  some  attempt  at  it  is 
necessary  in  order  to  explain  the  late  Greek  influence  over  the 
barbarians  from  Asia.  The  rule  of  Constantinople  had  always  been 
in  the  hands  of  a group  of  great  noble  families,  some  of  whom 
had  had  dynasties  on  the  throne.  In  their  struggles  for  power 
the  new  Emperors  gained  with  the  throne  a combination  of  enemies. 
To  oppose  Slavs  or  Turks  it  was  necessary  to  pacify  the  cabalists 
to  some  extent,  to  watch  constantly  for  their  plots,  to  procure 
money  for  mercenaries  and  to  maintain  dignity  against  internal 
chicanery  and  shamelessness  as  well  as  against  the  military 
pressure  from  without. 

December,  1400,  found  the  ruler  of  the  East  Roman  Empire 
in  London,  whither  he  had  gone  from  Paris,  seeking  in  these 
places  influence  for  a union  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  faith  as  his 
father  had  sought  in  Rome  Papal  good  will  for  the  reunion. 
Eugenius  IV  offered  sufficient  guarantee  of  dignity  to  John 
Palaeologus  and  the  Greek  bishops,  and  embarking  in  Papal  galleys 
in  1437,  they  arrived  in  Florence,  where  the  Council  was  to  hold 
its  sessions.  The  discussions  were  concerned  with  questions  that 
could  have  been  concluded  as  well  after  the  defensive  alliance 
between  the  East  and  the  West  had  been  arranged,  as  before. 

The  vigorous  and  subtle  contest,  however,  proves  a faith  still 
strong  on  both  sides  of  the  schism,  and  the  persistence  in  ritual 
and  details  of  tenet  almost  balance  the  lack  of  perspective. 


' 


i 


. 


: 


L/0 


At  Constantinople  the  populace  and  the  lower  clergy  both  re- 
pudiated the  ceremony  of  union  although  the  agreement  signed 
at  Florence  by  the  Emperor  and  clergy  ” tacitly  agreed  that  no 
change  should  be  attempted  in  creed  or  ceremonies”.!  The  only 
good  coming  from  the  attempt  was  the  transfer  of  a group  of 
Greek  scholars  to  a more  progressive  atmosphere.  Politics  in 
Constantinople  after  1439  entered  into  another  period  of  family 
plotting,  and  its  external  enemies  pressed  closely  upon  the 
city  in  its  last  years  of  Greek  rule.  Thessalonica  was  taken 
by  Venice  in  1438.  For  the  rest  the  Emperor  John  had  paid 
tribute.  A part  of  the  Morea,  and  Thrace,  and  the  isles  of 
Lemnos,  Thasos,  Imbrus,  and  Samothrace  remained  to  the  Roman 
Empire.  The  house  of  John  Paiaeologus  had  three  eligible 
princes,  and  to  quarrel  over  the  last  coronation  of  the  Empire 
was  not  beneath  Demetrius  and  Thomas.  The  latter,  however, 
with  the  Empress,  the  Senate  and  the  people  supported  the  eld- 
est brother,  who  at  that  time  was  absent  in  the  Morea.  He 

2 

took  the  name  of  Constantine  XII.  He  planned  another  appeal 
to  the  West,  but  the  death  of  Murad  II  in  1451  made  negligible 
any  assistance  from  Latin  Europe.  To  capture  the  city  was  the 
ambition  of  Mohammed  II  and  his  prize  was  the  crown  of  all  the 
Turkish  conquests. 

5~  Gibbon,  Edmund,  ”The  Decline  & Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire”.”" 
Vol.  7,  Ch.  LXIII . 


3 . Supra 


. 


. 


. 

. ' • 

. 


Byzantine  society  in  the  XV  century  was  rich  in  litera- 
ture and  art;  its  rulers  and  statesmen  were  vigorous  and  clever, 
if  not  always  wise.  The  heterogeneous  nature  of  the  population 
of  the  Empire  excluded  to  some  extent  the  virtue  of  patriotism, 
and  the  many  noble  families  of  Constantinople  kept  the  politi- 
cal life  filled  with  jealousy  and  dissension.  This  will  go 
far  to  explain  the  plotting  and  the  deceit;  when  they  chose  to 
fight,  however,  they  were  able  leaders.  The  little  group  of 
nobles  who  died  with  the  Emperor  at  the  gate  of  St.  Roamnos 
in  1453  were  heroic  men,  for  all  of  them  might  have  escaped  by 
merely  going  over  to  the  opposite  faction  in  the  city. 

But  if  the  internal  story  of  the  Byzantine  political 
life  is  not  very  edifying,  it  does  exhibit  the  diplomatic 
school  in  which  the  Emperors  learned  to  play  off  their  barbar- 
ous or  civilised  but  rapacious  enemies.  Intrigues  and  bribes 
were  useful  when  it  was  impossible  to  pay  armies  or  to  hire 
mercenaries,  and  the  modern  world  knows  what  promises  can  do 
when  arras  are  ineffectual.  To  keep  one's  power  against  the 
commercial  rapacity  of  Venice  and  Pi3a,  in  the  provincial 
seaports  as  well  as  in  Constantinople;  to  play  off  against 
French,  Papal,  Spanish  and  German  politics;  to  oppose  with 
efficacious  subtlety  the  Turks,  and  to  govern  a great  city 
filled  with  powerful  nobles  is  a task  for  an  able  man.  The 
political  life  of  the  Empire  was  exceedingly  complicated,  and 
it  has  been  noted  that  there  was  little  patriotism  ^or  an- 
chorage . 


liX  Ij'c 

. 

: 


. 

. • 

' 


V-2- ' 

The  basis  of  the  state,  as  well  as  those  benefitted  by 
its  efforts  were,  of  course,  the  common  people.  Like  their 
rulers  they  were  vigorous  and  in  political  wisdom  very  much 
higher  than  any  other  people  of  the  XV  century,  probably  not 
excepting  the  citizens  of  Venice  or  Rome.  In  spite  of  the 
mastery  of  the  clergy  and  the  state,  the  people  could  and  did 
act  when  they  were  exasperated.  Their  disagreements  may  as 
well  be  blamed  upon  the  clergy  as  upon  themselves,  and  their 
sincerity  in  intellectual  matters  as  revealed  by  the  schism 
of  the  union  question  at  the  time  of  the  fall  of  the  city  may 
possibly  recompense  the  lack  of  perspective.  Religious  feel- 
ing served  them  also  to  some  extent,  for  patriotism. 

The  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  commanded  the  reverence 
of  the  people  when  the  Emperor  was  undeserving,  and  the  good 
influence  of  his  clergy  was  the  backbone  of  the  national  in- 
tegrity. Over  ecclesiastical  controversy  the  people  fought 
and  died,  and  into  their  worship  they  poured  their  profits  as 
well  as  their  faith.  More  than  one  ransom,  bribe  or  tribute 
of  the  state  was  taken  from  the  churches,  and  these  treasure 
houses  stimulated  the  many  plunderers  who  besieged  the  city. 

The  clergy,  for  all  their  stability  acted  as  a somewhat  sta- 
tionary influence.  Constantinople  for  the  early  Middle  Ages 
was  the  intellectual  center  of  the  world.  "Under  her  shadow 
Athens  became  a sort  of  present  day  Oxford  or  Venice  and  Rome 
not  much  more  than  a vociferous  Berlin."!  It  was  not  the 


1.  Dwight,  H.  G.,  "Constantinople  Old  and  New"  Page  76 


■ 

. 

. • ' : 

. 

. 

t 

. 


i f . f 


4*3  - 

priest,  however,  nor  the  prince,  nor  the  merchant,  nor  the 
soldier,  who  revealed  to  the  world  the  richness  of  Byzantine 
civilisation,  even  the  architect  may  not  have  the  honor.  It 
belongs  to  the  artist.  Art,  as  a reflection  of  life  has  its 
greatest  value  to  the  student  of  history  when  it  is  expressed 
in  a work  emanating  from  the  artisan  rather  than  the  genius. 

The  sculpture  of  Praxitiles  and  his  master  is  far  too  lofty 
to  tell  as  much  of  Greek  life  shortly  after  the  Periclean  Age 
as  do  the  coins,  the  grave  monuments  or  a frying  pan. 

This  differentiation  is  verified  notably  in  comparing 
the  famous  works  of  official  Byzantine  decoration  with  the 
bracelet,  ring  or  lamp  of  the  people.  The  great  characteristic 
of  objects  of  common  use  treated  in  an  artistic  manner  is  rich- 
ness of  design^  based  upon  a great  freedom  in  the  use  of  animal, 
vegetative  and  geometric  combination.  There  is  a grotesque 
feeling  about  the  execution  of  animal  forms  such  as  is  found  in 
lamps  or  small  architectural  sculpture,  that  is  more  naturalist- 
ic and  at  the  same  time  more  weird  than  the  French  or  the  Span- 
ish Gothic  manner  of  treatment.  Human  figures  and  faces  in 
genre  work  are  often  very  crude.  Perhaps  this  may  be  explained 
as  an  effort  at  indistinct  approximation  for  religious  reasons, 
as  are  the  figures  in  the  Court  of  Lions  at  the  Alhambra.  Or 
it  is  more  probable  that  anatomical  studies  which  had  dis- 
played the  accuracy  of  Greek  and  Roman  observation  had  ceased 
to  be  taught.  Whatever  may  be  the  more  accurate  reason,  it  is 

1.  Different  from  the  Celtic  in  that  there  is  less  of  the 
geometric  and  a more  natural  treatment. 


.. 


; 

‘ 

■ 


V‘( 

not  connected  with  the  lack  of  technical  skill,  for  the  treat- 
ment of  vegetative  and  animal  forms,  while  simple  and  vigor- 
ous, is  not  grotesque,  or  too  rigid.  But  there  is  even  a 
clearer  characteristic  of  Byzantine  art  than  variety  in  de- 
sign: the  colors  are  very  rich  in  tone^and  in  combination. 

The  variety  of  color  in  the  marble  facing  of  Sancta  Sophia 
has  been  mentioned.  In  genre  work  enamels,  gold,  silver, 
gilt,  and  jewels  in  designs  and  choice  of  color  of  almost 
barbarous  richness  did  they  not  possess  what  appears  to  be 
a certain  reserve  and  dignity.1 2  Their  designs  in  fabrics 
were  copied  all  over  western  Europe.  That  of  the  double 
headed  eagle  in  regalia  is  sufficiently  well  known,  as  it  is 
used  even  in  democratic  countries,  to  serve  as  an  indication 
of  this  influence. 

There  seems  to  have  been  a fragment  of  nearly  everything 
found  in  Egyptian  tombs,  at  any  rate  these  valuable  repositor- 
ies have  given  up  some  fifth  century  Byzantine  fabrics. 

Throughout  the  Renaissance^  there  are  in  paintings  figures 
clothed  in  what  appears  to  be  the  "all  over"  designs  from 

n 

Byzantine  looms."  Any  Papal  cope  shows  this,  also,  having  in 
addition  borders  of  a kind  of  lozenge  in  which  hagiogra  graphic 

1.  Williams,  Leonard,  "Arts  and  Crafts  of  Older  Spain"  Vol.  II, 

page  21. 

1441-1523,  Signorelli,  Luca,  The  picture  called  "Mary  Salome". 
1430-1494,  Crivelli  » " " "Virgin  and 

Child". 

1500-1571,  Bordone  of  Treviso  " " " "The  Ring  of 

Saint  Mark 
handed  to 
the  Doge". 

Early  XVth,  Quirizio  " n n "Santa  Luca". 

2.  Burlington  Magazine,  Volume  XXXV,  p.167,  Oct.  15,  1919. 


t 


. 


. 


. 


■ . 

• l 


■ 


. 


. 

■ 


pictures  are  embroidered  or  painted. 

The  carved  ivory, ^ inherited  in  early  feeling  from  the 
early  Imperial  period,  but  later  conventionalised,  furnished 
models  for  reliquary  boxes,  plaques  and  ivory  decoration  of 
many  varieties  to  all  Europe,  and  even  as  late  as  the  tenth 
century  possessed  a considerable  degree  of  grace  and  veracity. 
The  sacred  utensils,  as  well  as  the  profane,  were  of  an  Oriental 
richness  in  color  and  design  of  their  ornamentation.  The 
pottery  forms  either  very  good  or  else  somewhat  crude.  There 
is  no  general  level  of  superior  pottery  as  was  the  average 
grade  of  Attic  ware.  There  is  a suggestion  in  all  of  such  work 
of  Semitic  decoration  upon  Aryan  forms.  Indeed,  if  one  were 
to  venture  into  a distinction  of  Eyzantine  genre  art,  he  would 
in  some  manner  point  out  this  combination.  Certainly  that  is 
a safe  generalisation  to  make  in  comparing  Byzantine,  Persian 
and  Arabic  pottery.2 

The  spread  of  official  art,  mostly  of  a hagiographic 
nature,  went  along  with  the  disperaion  of  Byzantine  architectur- 
al form  over  Western  Europe  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  centuries. 

It  is  stately  in  effect  of  line  and  composition,  and  very  rich 
in  color.  Probably  the  greater  spirituality  of  the  best  Greek 
churches  over  those  of  Italy  or  France  is  accounted  for  in  the 
superiority  of  this  decoration  to  the  rationality  in  decora- 
tion employed  in  the  Renaissance. 

Byzantine  society  of  the  XV  century,  embellished  with 

2 1.  See  the  "R.Khan  Monif  Collection  of  Persian  Antiquities” 
catalogue.  Sale  in  Chicago,  191S. 

1 8.  Dalton,  Armonde  Maddock,  "Byzantine  Art  and  Archaeology”, 
Series  of  plates  of  ivory  work. 


. 


: 


: 


' 


- 


' 


.......  ..  . 


yL 

this  rich  and  widely  diffused  art,  was  distinctly  in  the  grand 
style,  and  however  poor  or  hard  pressed  her  fortunes  were, 
Constantinople  never  forgot  her  imperial  position.  Gibbon  de- 
scribes the  elaborate  ceremony  insisted  upon  by  John  Palaelogus 
at  Venice,  when  he  was  about  to  disembark  from  the  Papal  gal- 
leys; while  at  Ferrara  he  was  served  by  princes,  all  of  whom 
possessed  greater  wealth  and  power  than  he.  A few  months 
before  the  beginning  of  the  siege,  there  was  in  preparation 
an  elaborate  and  very  costly  embassy  to  Georgia.  The  name 
of  the  city  was  still  a synonym  of  splendor,  and  Constantinople 
was  still  the  "vilie  lumiere”^ for  much  of  the  civilised  world. 

The  contempt  of  the  modern  Turk  for  his  Christian  sub- 
jects can  not  be  today  more  intense  than  in  the  Xv  century  when 
their  religious  feeling  and  national  pride  justified  somewhat 
their  point  of  view.  They  coveted  the  wealth  of  the  city,  its 
site  and  buildings,  but  much  of  the  culture  which  it  sheltered 
they  misunderstood  and  despised.  The  religion  they  thought  of 
as  idolatry,  and  the  commercial  rather  than  the  military  nature 
of  the  populace  seemed  to  them  unmanly.  There  are  no  Turkish 
literary  records  prior  to  the  time  of  Mohammed  II,  but  even  a 
superficial  acquaintance  with  Moslem  culture  as  it  is  carried 
on  by  its  Ottoman  believers  will  settle  the  fate  of  the  an- 
cient and  complex  culture  of  Constantinople  in  the  hands  of 
nomads  hardly  two  hundred  years  from  the  Altai  grasslands. 

1.  Dwight,  N.  G.  ’’Constantinople,  Old  & New.”  i 


■ 

; 

l I 

. 

. 


As  a matter  of  fact,  expediency  tempered  the  policy  of  Mo- 
hammed II,  and  he  made  a good  many  concessions  with  regard  to 
political  and  religious  liberty  to  insure  the  peace  of  the  new 


capital.  Colonies  were  imported  from  the  Morea,  Anastris, 
Sinope,  Euboea  and  Samothrace.^ 

THE  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  TURKS 

Although  the  city  was  thoroughly  plundered  after  its 
siege  of  fifty-three  days,  the  destruction  of  its  architectural 
monuments  was  very  slight.  Mohammed  II  knew  the  value  of  his 
new  capital,  and  he  set  out  from  the  first  to  augment  its 
prestige  and  adornment.  The  damage  of  his  cannon  was  repaired, 
and  after  removing  the  ecclesiastical  furniture  from  Sancta 
Sophia,  he  ordered  the  interior  to  be  whitewashed.  The  exteri- 
or he  embellished  with  four  minarets  and  with  gardens,  and  the 
upkeep  of  the  former  cathedral  was  guaranteed  by  taxes  from 
segregated  lands.  His  Mohammedieh  was  finished  in  1469,  and 
the  Mosque  of  Eyoub  in  1481. 

The  Turkish  mosques  form  an  architectural  development 
which  may  be  traced  thru  their  succession  of  political  capitals. 
The  exterior  appearance  is  responsible  for  the  impression  that 
the  mosques  are  a more  or  less  successful  imitation  of  Sancta 
Sophia.  This  is  not  true.  At  Brousa  the  Jami  Mosque,  being 

1.  Gibbon,  Edmund,  "The  Decline  & Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire", 

Vol.  7,  p-*'0 


. 


It. 

built  from  about  1360  to  1421  has  the  side  aisles  divided  into 
bays.  It  is  open  in  the  center,  and  there  is  a fountain,  a 
feature  which  later  was  placed  before  the  building.  At 
Adrianople,  the  dome  lies  upon  eight  instead  of  four  piers, 
recalling  the  radiate  plan  of  church  in  some  of  the  north  Syrian 
cities.  Several  mosque  yards  in  Constantinople  are  surrounded 
by  a cloister,  the  bays  of  which  are  surmounted  by  a lead  dome. 
The  idea  of  these  bays  as  used  at  Brousa  is  carried  out  in  the 
Suleimanieh  side  aisles  and  in  most  of  the  other  mosques  of  the 
capital.  Such  matters  show  the  adaptability  rather  than  the 
imitative  capacity  of  the  Turkish  architect.^ 

Probably  the  most  sacred  of  all  the  churches  of  Con- 
stantinople was  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Apostles.  In  this 
church  of  Justinian  was  buried  the  body  of  Saint  Andrew,  and 
the  relics  which  had  augmented  the  sanctity  of  the  structure 
had  insured  it  from  all  harm  until  the  depredations  of  the 
Crusaders  in  1204.  The  results  of  their  raid  were  placed  in 
that  jewel  of  Paris,  the  Sainte  Chape lie.  After  the  Turkish 
conquest,  the  Patriarch  who  had  been  appointed,  retired  to  this 
sructure,  but  shortly  afterward  removed  to  the  Pammakaristos, 
and  the  Church  of  the  Apostles  was  razed  for  the  Mohammedieh. 

Very  little  is  known  of  the  architect  of  the  Mohammedieh, 

>1 

same  that  it  is  definitely  stated  that  he  was  a Greek  Christian 

1.  Gurlitt,  Cornelius,  nDie  Baukunst  Constant inopels",  plate 
14  e. 


— — — =——=—= 

resident  of  Constantinople  at  the  time  of  the  conquest.^  The 
decoration  that  he  chose  is  lost,  for  the  building  as  it  stands 
today  is  a restoration  of  an  eighteenth  century  Italian  archi- 
tect. His  treatment  is  floral,  and  is  distinctly  western, 

Mohammed's  other  mosque  is  at  the  village  of  Eyoub,  and 
it  is  commemorative  of  that  saintly  Arab  warrior  who  had  fallen 
in  the  Saracen  siege  of  the  city  in  the  eighth  century.  Of  all 
mosques,  the  Eyoub  is  the  most  sacred.  It  is  a very  simple 
structure,  a dome  on  a drum.  The  walls  are  covered  with  green 
and  blue  tiles. 

The  Mosque  of  Bajuzet  II,  like  the  church  of  Justinian, 
has  but  two  semidomes,  but  the  stress  is  taken  by  large  piers, 
and  a retaining  column  in  the  center  of  each  of  the  great  arches,1 2 
rather  than  by  the  exterior  buttresses.  The  obscure  architect, 
Haireddin,  was  the  first  Turkish  architect  to  use  the  monolith- 
ic shaft  and  the  stalactic  capital.  It  is  a simple  and  noble 
building.  There  is  both  a cloister  and  a garden. 

The  Suleimanieh  was  erected  between  the  years  1550-1555 
by  Sultan  Suleiman  the  Magnificent.  It  is  considered  at  once 
typical  and  the  best  of  the  Constantinopolitan  mosques,  and  it 

1.  "Nous  n'ignorous  pas  d'ailleurs  (la  mosquee)  qu'elle  avait 

ete  lienee  en  1468  par  1* architect  gier  Chrisopoulos  sur 
les  mines  del'anciene  iglise  des  Sant e-Apat res  fonaee 
pour  Constantine  le  Grand  pour  serven  de  lien  sepultre 
aux  erapereaie  d'Orient." 

2.  Gurlitt,  Cornelius,  "Die  Baukunst  Const anti nope Is",  plate  14d. 


. 

; 

. 

.•  i t;  - 

i. 

. 

. 

. • • 

. 


1 

■ 


is  the  great  work  of  the  Turkish  architect,  Sinan.  Like  all 
of  the  Imperial  mosques,  it  commemorates  a victory.  It  tri- 
umphs over  Christianity,  indeed,  for  the  palace  of  Belisarius 
and  the  church  of  Saint  Euphemia  both  contributed  material  to 
it,  as  did  also  the  Greek  theatre  cf  Chrysopolis  in  Nicomedia. 
Structurally  it  resembles  Sancta  Sophia  in  the  principal  feat- 
ures, but  in  addition,  there  is  a cloister  in  the  same  position 
as  the  atrium  that  once  stood  before  Sancta  Sophia,  while  in 
the  garden  at  the  rear  of  the  Mosque  there  are  the  tombs  of 
Suleiman  and  Roxelana.  There  is  no  apse,  and  the  different 
arrangement  of  the  side  aisles  has  been  mentioned.  The  windov/s 
are  more  numerous,  however,  and  give  a jewel-like  appearance 
from  the  white  glazed  glass  of  their  small  circular  panes.1 
Some  of  the  other  structures  of  Sinan  are  the  Zal 

. A 

Mahmoud  Pasha  mosque,  for  a vizer  of  Selim  II j the  Mihriraah 
mosque,  the  Valideh  Atik  mosque,  the  Sokolli  Mehmud  Pasha, 
aome  tombs  in  the  village  of  Eyoub,  the  Shah-zade  and  its  ad- 
jacent tomb, — "the  most  perfect  monument  of  its  kind  in 
, > 

St amboul". 

Sinan  was  not  only  a great  architect;  he  wa6  a great 
artist.  He  has  shown  this  in  his  ability  to  adapt  indigene- 
ous  forms  to  his  needs  and  to  stamp  his  structure  with  the 

1.  Dwight,  H.  G. "Constantinople  Old  & New",  page  46,  also 
Gurlitt,  Cornelius,  "Die  Baukunst  die  Constant inopels", 
plate  14d. 


6! 


serenity  of  Islam.  There  is  no  celestial  light  in  the 
Suleimanieh.  It  is  serene,  it  is  full  of  sunlight  and.  peace. 
Sancta  Sophia  has  also  a sublimity  fully  as  notable,  but  it 
is  aweful  sublimity,  it  is  overpowering  in  the  accentuation 
of  distances  by  lights  and  by  deep  shadows,  its  richness  sur- 
charges the  interior  with  a spirituality  impossible  to  the 
more  simply  adorned  imperial  mosoue.  Sin=t.n  had  the  opportuni- 
ty for  diversity,  and  he  used  it.  He  could  build  a clever 
wall  fountain,  a graceful  tomb  or  a monumental  mosque. 

He  was,  moreover,  a great  decorator  and  it  was  under 
him  that  Turkish  architecture  began  to  assume  its  most  dis- 
tinctively Turkish  feature, — the  decorative  tile.  When  not 
to  employ  them  is  the  artist’s  problem,  and  in  Si nan’ s mosques 
there  is  shown  on  the  whole  the  wisest  reserve.  He  had  a happy 

faculty  for  knowing  just  where  they  were  needed  most, a 

tapestry  panel  of  them  around  the  mihrab  or  beside  the  doorway 
of  the  turbeh,  around  a wall  as  a panel  between  panels,  where 

western  architects  would  have  used  a moulding, following 

thus  the  Byzantine  decoration  by  means  of  facing  a wall  in 
panels.  He  usually  chose  a floral  convention  in  which  at  in- 
tervals medallions  of  decorative  writing  were  set.  Some  of  the 
smaller  structures  were  tiled  up  to  the  spring  of  the  dome,  as 
the  Rustem  Pasha  or  the  Sultana  Valideh. 

Even  a wall  fountain  was  not  beneath  the  notice  of  this 
great  man.  "One  that  controverts  the  canon  of  orthodox  Mo- 
hammedan art  is  to  be  admired  in  the  handsome  bath  of  Sancta 


--  • V •• 

. 

. 

- 

■ 

» ! • . .. 

. ' ; . .JO 

- ! 

to-  ...  ,3 

1 

. ‘-y 

i - -ft-; 

i 

. 


: . 


Sophia a work  of  Sinan where  three  dolphins,  their 

tails  in  the  air,  spout  water  into  a fluted  basin.  I have 
wondered  if  these  unorthodox  ore&tureB  like  the  lions  in  so 


many  gardens,  may  not  perpetuate  a Byzantine  tradition,  if  not 
Byzantine  workmanship.  In  a neighboring  fountain  there  are 
motifs  of  the  egg,  the  peacock,  and  the  shell.  This  is  not 
Sinan' s,  but  it  will  indicate  the  independence  from  absolute 
convention,  as  well  as  the  cleverness  of  Ottoman  artists  in 
the  periods  of  their  best  work. 

Ottoman  architecture  has  often  been  differentiated  from 
the  older  systems  of  construction  by  calling  it  rather  a mode 
of  decoration.  The  sacred  buildings  differ  in  their  decoration, 
but  in  the  consistent  similarity  of  their  construction,  they 
all  resemble  their  Christian  archetype.  After  the  Suleimanieh 
there  are  no  superior  mosques.  The  decoration  becomes  less 
fine  and  the  construction  much  too  regular,  as  in  the  Ahmedieh. 

It  is  a perfect  square,  and  regular  throughout;  for  this  reason 
it  is  not  at  all  effective.  There  is  no  center  of  interest. 

Its  six  minarets  and  its  regularity,  however,  make  it  the  most 
pleasing  of  all  the  mosques  in  the  city.  The  last  great  mosque 
was  built  in  1755  by  the  Sultan  Osman  III. 

There  is  practically  nothing,  either  in  the  city  or  in 
the  provincial  cities,  which  may  be  called  distinctively  Turkish, 


1.  Dwight,  N.  G. 


"Constantinople  Old  & New",  page  356. 


civil  or  domestic  architecture.  The  cosmopolitan  nature  of 
the  population  makes  the  identification  too  difficult,  and  the 
frequent  fires  have  made  historic  comparison  impossible.  The 
government  palaces  have  been  erected  by  Armenian  or  French 
architects,  and  the  designs  have  been  almost  entirely  French. 


. : i 


, ■ 


THE  BYZANTINE  CHARACTER  OF  OTTOMAN  ARCHITECTURE 


In  becoming  acquainted  with  the  Turkish  architecture 

in  Constantinople,  one  easily  falls  into  an  admiration  for  it. 

To  judge  it  critically  one  ought  to  know  much  of  the  men  who 

were  employed  as  designers  before  he  may  safely  credit  of 

Turkish  genius,  but  even  what  little  one  may  identify,  like 

that  of  Sinan,  is  a substantial  testimony  to  the  artistic  genius 

of  a people  who,  two  hundred  years  before  they  built  their  first 

mosque,  were  probably  as  crude  and  repulsive  as  any  tribe  of 

1 

Asiatic  nomads.  As  such  they  built  only  tents,  but  as  masters 
of  Constantinople  they  raised  places  of  worship  that  for 

U 

structural  defects  are  no  worse  off  than  Be$onoretti ' s St.  Peters. 
They  lack  a distinctive  art  of  building,  but  are  not  imitators; 
and  if  they  are  to  be  called  imitators  so  then  must  any  other 
design  whose  work  has  antecedents. 

Christian  civilization  had  long  passed  its  first 
millennium  when  the  Ottaman  Turks  became  to  know  it;  and  to 
build  upon  it  rather  than  to  begin  an  evolution  of  a new 
art,  was  the  natural  process  for  the  more  primitive  civilization 
to  follow. 

At  the  time  it  was  taken  up  by  the  Turks,  Byzantine  Art 
has  spread  from  Paris  to  Cairo.  It  permeated  these  regions 

1 Art  and  Archaeology.  J arwarRy  ,14  2-0, 


- 

'1 


. 

: 


! 


. 


& 


1 

so  throughly  that  its  influences  are  not  dissipated  today. 

The  Turks  had  very  easily  felt  its  influence,  and  the 
impression  which  Byzantine  Art  made  on  them  in  the  diplomatic 
visits  of  the  Sultans  and  their  officials  undoubtedly  stimulated 


their  ambition  to  have  the  city. 

Their  genius  lay  in  their  ability  to  perceive  what  was 

architecturally  superior.  "There  are  in  or  about  Constantinople 

at  least  a hundred  mosques,  erected  during  the  four  centuries 

in  which  the  Turks  ha  :e  possessed  the  city.  Not  one  of  them 

is  a pillared  court,  like  those  of  Egypt  or  Syria,  none  even 

an  extended  bosilicce,  like  those  of  Barbary  or  Spain.  All  are 

copies,  more  or  less  modified  of  Sancta  Sophia  , no 

Christian  ever  appreciated  its  beauty  but  the  Turk  saw 

2 

and  seized  it  at  a glance." 


1 The  archaism  of  such  school  of  sculpture  as  that  to  which 
Mr.  Paul  Manship  belongs  has-  a suggestion  of  Byzantine 
treatment,  although  it  is  a little  more  closely  related  to 
the  Perjelean  age  of  Greek  sculpture.  The  treatment  of  the 
interior  decoration  of  St.  John  the  Divine  ancd  of  the  best 
churches  in  North  America,  is  strongly  Byzantine.  Mr.  Frank 
Brangwin  is  influenced  by  the  color  and  composition  of 
Byzantine  mural  decoration. 

2 Tergasson,  James,  "History  of  Architecture",  Vol.  II,  p.  558. 


